• 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!

Ending US military gay ban 'won't harm war effort'

Discrimination is always going to happen. Completely getting rid of DADT is the only way to effectively decrease discrimination against gays. Without DADT, gays will be able to report cases of discrimination without fear that they will be discharged, or under what you propose, punished because of their sexuality.

You just don't know how wrong you are. But, hey! Rock on!!

When it turns into a complete Charlie Foxtrot, don't say that you weren't warned.
 
Because those "heightened privacy rules" would not apply or not apply in the same way to heterosexual personnel. That is discrimination.




The DADT policy since its implementation has been the transition, although not an official one.

Under DADT, especially within the last decade, only a person's CO could initiate an investigation into a person's sexuality. And unless there was some official record that actually proved a person was homosexual, a CO could choose to not investigate a person who even stated multiple times and the COC even believed was gay. Which means that every person joining the military should understand that they will be serving with homosexuals, even some who can say that they are homosexual. It would completely depend on the chain of command as to whether the person is discharged or even investigated for simple statements of homosexuality or even public displays out of uniform.

This is a transition from the old policy, which was essentially, if you were suspected of being homosexual, anyone could call you out on it. And if the CO knew about it, not only would he violate the policy of no homosexuals, but also, the person made a false official statement since they used to officially ask about a person's sexuality.

Actually, those new rules would apply to everyone. But, I don't expect you to comprehend that.
 
Actually, those new rules would apply to everyone. But, I don't expect you to comprehend that.

They couldn't possibly apply to heterosexuals, for two reasons.

First, the military gives benefits to spouses of military members. Since the military only recognizes opposite sex couples, only opposite sex couples could admit to being married. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what someone's sexuality most likely is from who they are married to.

Also, the military has military balls and dances, not to mention many bases have "clubs". It is considered completely okay for a man to dance with a woman at such events or places, even if on base and/or in uniform. Would it be okay for a man to dance with a man or a woman to dance with a woman at these events or places, on base and/or in uniform?

Along with this, it is completely impossible to separate every military member's private life from their military life. The military is not just a job. Deployments ensure that people you work with will find out about more private details of your life unless you are forced to completely hide who you are attracted to and/or dating. Forcing everyone to completely hide such attractions and relationships would most likely result in very low morale.
 
They couldn't possibly apply to heterosexuals, for two reasons.

First, the military gives benefits to spouses of military members. Since the military only recognizes opposite sex couples, only opposite sex couples could admit to being married. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what someone's sexuality most likely is from who they are married to.

Also, the military has military balls and dances, not to mention many bases have "clubs". It is considered completely okay for a man to dance with a woman at such events or places, even if on base and/or in uniform. Would it be okay for a man to dance with a man or a woman to dance with a woman at these events or places, on base and/or in uniform?

Along with this, it is completely impossible to separate every military member's private life from their military life. The military is not just a job. Deployments ensure that people you work with will find out about more private details of your life unless you are forced to completely hide who you are attracted to and/or dating. Forcing everyone to completely hide such attractions and relationships would most likely result in very low morale.

How about we just take it one step at a time? Get gays, in the system and work out the issues that arise from their simply being there. Then, you can phase is the rest of that stuff as time goes along.

I believe--in other words, in my opinion--if you try to force things to happen, there will be negative consequences.

You want this to work, right? Why not take it easy, rather than trying to stuff a hundred pounds of ****, in a ten pound bag.
 
How about we just take it one step at a time? Get gays, in the system and work out the issues that arise from their simply being there. Then, you can phase is the rest of that stuff as time goes along.

I believe--in other words, in my opinion--if you try to force things to happen, there will be negative consequences.

You want this to work, right? Why not take it easy, rather than trying to stuff a hundred pounds of ****, in a ten pound bag.

They have been phased-in. I served with gays that I knew were gay since 2000, and when I expressed surprise at finding out one of the guys I knew was gay, the rest of those who were in our class were just as surprised at my own ignorance. Very few guys nowdays should ever use the excuse that they never served with gays before so it would be new to them. They have served, whether they knew it or not. They need to get over it, and do their jobs.
 
How about we just take it one step at a time? Get gays, in the system and work out the issues that arise from their simply being there. Then, you can phase is the rest of that stuff as time goes along.

I believe--in other words, in my opinion--if you try to force things to happen, there will be negative consequences.

You want this to work, right? Why not take it easy, rather than trying to stuff a hundred pounds of ****, in a ten pound bag.

Your position doesn't really make any sense.

Why make a big deal out of this? Every other military which has phased in openly serving gays has found it to be much to do about nothing. There is no reason to believe that is going to change with our miliary. Trying to create some convoluted policy to protect everyone is more trouble than it is worth. If someone is acting in an unprofessional manner, whether they are gay or straight, there are already policies to deal with it.

This is pretty much the McCain tactic. "Oh yeah, let's do away with the ban. But first let's have a study. And then another study because we didn't like the first study. And then have several hearings even though we have had like a dozen hearings on this issue already. And then let's have another study so that we can know the absolute perfect way of doing away with this policy"

It never ends. It's nothing but a stall tactic.
 
Your position doesn't really make any sense.

Why make a big deal out of this? Every other military which has phased in openly serving gays has found it to be much to do about nothing. There is no reason to believe that is going to change with our miliary. Trying to create some convoluted policy to protect everyone is more trouble than it is worth. If someone is acting in an unprofessional manner, whether they are gay or straight, there are already policies to deal with it.

This is pretty much the McCain tactic. "Oh yeah, let's do away with the ban. But first let's have a study. And then another study because we didn't like the first study. And then have several hearings even though we have had like a dozen hearings on this issue already. And then let's have another study so that we can know the absolute perfect way of doing away with this policy"

It never ends. It's nothing but a stall tactic.

What's your hurry? Seriously!

If this isn't just about, "I'm gay and **** all you straight mother ****ers", then just chill and allow things to work themselves out.

I've stated time-n-again that I support lifting the ban on gays and you all insist that I'm a homophobe, that doesn't want gays to serve in the armed forces. You make yourselves look like assholes when you act that way. And, now, I'm stalling?

I think it all aboils down to one thing: you want your agenda, right now and **** what anyone else thinks. Well, out here in the real world, that's just not how it works.
 
What's your hurry? Seriously!

If this isn't just about, "I'm gay and **** all you straight mother ****ers", then just chill and allow things to work themselves out.

I've stated time-n-again that I support lifting the ban on gays and you all insist that I'm a homophobe, that doesn't want gays to serve in the armed forces. You make yourselves look like assholes when you act that way. And, now, I'm stalling?

I think it all aboils down to one thing: you want your agenda, right now and **** what anyone else thinks. Well, out here in the real world, that's just not how it works.

I never called you a homophobe. I also believe this policy needs to be phased in slowly and responsibly. The problem here is that can be done after it is repealed. There is no conceivable reason that repeal has to be stalled. We can repeal this policy and allow the Pentagon to take its time in implementing the policies that need to be in place. It took 5 years after Truman signed the executive order to desegregate the armed forces for it be fully implemented.

Why am I in a hurry? Because people are still getting discharged. Of course it doesn't bother you, but every day another gay person may be kicked out the military even if they have been serving admirably simply because they are gay. The longer this policy is on the books, the more people who get kicked out. So **** me if I have an "agenda" to see to it that honorable soldiers are not discharged because of their sexual orientation.

And yes, there is a sense of urgency for us to get it repealed now because this lame duck session is our last chance to do it. McCain has vowed that he will not repeal DADT. He will ask for more hearings, more studies, and more time just so he can appease his far right political base.
 
Last edited:
I never called you a homophobe. I also believe this policy needs to be phased in slowly and responsibly. The problem here is that can be done after it is repealed. There is no conceivable reason that repeal has to be stalled. We can repeal this policy and allow the Pentagon to take its time in implementing the policies that need to be in place. It took 5 years after Truman signed the executive order to desegregate the armed forces for it be fully implemented.

Who said anything about stalling the repeal? If we had a CIC, with a pair, he would lift the ban by executive order, and leave a redefined DADT policy in place. Then, the DOD could start ironing out the transition.

Why am I in a hurry? Because people are still getting discharged. Of course it doesn't bother you, but every day another gay person may be kicked out the military even if they have been serving admirably simply because they are gay. The longer this policy is on the books, the more people who get kicked out. So **** me if I have an "agenda" to see to it that honorable soldiers are not discharged because of their sexual orientation.

I doubt that gays are getting kicked everyday. Your post just goes to show that you're not nearly as interested in what's best for the country, or the armed forces, but what's good the gay community.

And yes, there is a sense of urgency for us to get it repealed now because this lame duck session is our last chance to do it. McCain has vowed that he will not repeal DADT. He will ask for more hearings, more studies, and more time just so he can appease his far right political base.

Well, don't be surprised if they don't pull it off.
 
And yes, there is a sense of urgency for us to get it repealed now because this lame duck session is our last chance to do it. McCain has vowed that he will not repeal DADT. He will ask for more hearings, more studies, and more time just so he can appease his far right political base.

please stop. posting crap like this just makes you look stupid. No one on the far right likes McCain. he is waaaaaaaay too freaking "moderate" for their tastes.

saying McCain has a far right political base is like saying Michael Jackson hated plastic surgery.
 
Back
Top Bottom