• 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!

Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

Jetboogieman said:
I thought Liberals were the kings of the "What If's".

What if Godzilla attacked?
Click to expand...

Apparently, you're thinking is incorrect. Do you have some evidence supporting "I thought Liberals were the kind of "What If's"?" because you keep using that phrase... so only Liberals can cite a what if scenario and it's written somewhere Liberals alone have that ability and it's off limits to everyone else.
 
Jetboogieman said:
To be fair dude, it was Bill Clintons baby
Click to expand...
Grimjack19 said:
Clinton actually wanted to let gays serve openly, DADT was a compromise forced on him by Congress. And he has since supported the repeal of the policy.
Click to expand...

Clinton instituted DADT in response to law passed by Congress in 1993.

It was in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994.

SEC. 571. POLICY CONCERNING HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE ARMED FORCES.
 
Ockham said:
Apparently, you're thinking is incorrect. Do you have some evidence supporting "I thought Liberals were the kind of "What If's"?" because you keep using that phrase... so only Liberals can cite a what if scenario and it's written somewhere Liberals alone have that ability and it's off limits to everyone else.
Click to expand...

The point was likley that anyone can present a wild what if, but that doesn't mean such a problem will be real or wide spread. What ifs can be debilitating. We have to deal more with things much more substancial.
 
soccerboy22 said:
I really don't know what the President can do aside from trying to get them to vote on it now. Which of course they won't do. It looks like if the President wants something done he will need to sign an executive order.
Click to expand...



Ain't going to happen...
 
Heavy Duty said:
Like straight soldiers not wanting to shower with gay soldiers. There are few shower stalls in the barracks. Usually one big open room with shower ports. In the field, you drop your draws and wash in the open. Line units carrying live ammo are the last people you want to get into it over a straight soldier thinking or actually happening, that a gay soldier was looking at them in a sexual manner. Next thing you know you have a murder in a unit. That does no one any good straight or gay.
Click to expand...

The thing is, this is really a nonissue. In point of fact, most in the military have showered with gays already, it's not going to be something new. I doubt very much that most barracks have open bay showers...hell, we had shower stalls onboard ship. It's a mindless emotional reaction that will be quickly overcome. It's no big deal.
 
Redress said:
The thing is, this is really a nonissue. In point of fact, most in the military have showered with gays already, it's not going to be something new. I doubt very much that most barracks have open bay showers...hell, we had shower stalls onboard ship. It's a mindless emotional reaction that will be quickly overcome. It's no big deal.
Click to expand...

Did they shower with gays knowing? So you are going to tell me that the many 1970-1990 constructed barracks have shower stalls? Not in any of the latrines that I have seen. NCO have private rooms, everyone else in the barracks shower together in a usually 8 head shower. No stalls, no curtains and no privacy.

And yes it is a big deal. We once have a kid a few other soldiers thought was gay. They caught him alone one night and beat the **** out of him. You going to tell that kid and the many others that have experienced the same type of abuse its no "BIG DEAL"? Its only a mindless reaction and the men whom beat you will slowly come to accept you? Get real.:roll:
 
Last edited:
Heavy Duty said:
Did they shower with gays knowing? So you are going to tell me that the many 1970-1990 constructed barracks have shower stalls? Not in any of the latrines that I have seen. NCO have private rooms, everyone else in the barracks shower together in a usually 8 head shower. No stalls, no curtains and no privacy.

And yes it is a big deal. We once have a kid a few other soldiers thought was gay. They caught him alone one night and beat the **** out of him. You going to tell that kid and the many others that have experienced the same type of abuse its no "BIG DEAL"? Its only a mindless reaction and the men whom beat you will slowly come to accept you? Get real.:roll:
Click to expand...

Knowing or not, they did shower with them. And anyone who beats up anyone is at fault. You don't blame the victim. You crack down on those who abuse. Period.
 
Heavy Duty said:
And yes it is a big deal. We once have a kid a few other soldiers thought was gay. They caught him alone one night and beat the **** out of him. You going to tell that kid and the many others that have experienced the same type of abuse its no "BIG DEAL"? Its only a mindless reaction and the men whom beat you will slowly come to accept you? Get real.:roll:
Click to expand...

Those soldiers who beat their gay comrade you mentioned, guess what? They are criminals.

We don't determine our policy based on what will best placate criminals. It doesn't matter what some bigoted soldier may or may not accept. They are professional soldiers, they can accept their orders or they shouldn't sign up anyway.
 
Heavy Duty said:
Did they shower with gays knowing? So you are going to tell me that the many 1970-1990 constructed barracks have shower stalls? Not in any of the latrines that I have seen. NCO have private rooms, everyone else in the barracks shower together in a usually 8 head shower. No stalls, no curtains and no privacy.

And yes it is a big deal. We once have a kid a few other soldiers thought was gay. They caught him alone one night and beat the **** out of him. You going to tell that kid and the many others that have experienced the same type of abuse its no "BIG DEAL"? Its only a mindless reaction and the men whom beat you will slowly come to accept you? Get real.:roll:
Click to expand...

Yes I am going to tell you that. I served from 87-93, and every barracks I stayed in after boot camp had shower stalls. Navy barracks had shower stalls or showers for each room, air force barracks had showers in each room, and marine barracks had shower stalls...never stayed at an army base, but I suspect the same would be true there.

If some one catches a gay soldier and beats the hell out of them, there are already regulations in place to handle that, and as long as they are enforced, things like that will end, and fast.
 
Redress said:
Yes I am going to tell you that. I served from 87-93, and every barracks I stayed in after boot camp had shower stalls. Navy barracks had shower stalls or showers for each room, air force barracks had showers in each room, and marine barracks had shower stalls...never stayed at an army base, but I suspect the same would be true there.

If some one catches a gay soldier and beats the hell out of them, there are already regulations in place to handle that, and as long as they are enforced, things like that will end, and fast.
Click to expand...

Benning didn't in '86, Dineyland at Knox did in '88 and I don't remember much about the showers at Yokota Air Base for the 2 weeks I was there in 1990. But at the time, if someone was gay they didn't say or show a peep back then. If openly gay members are going to be openly gay, there will be problems... I don't believe the Army has progressed or the Marines have progressed to tolerance of that level. Sure, some individuals will be accepted but I have to think the majority will not. This could tear apart our military. Frankly, I don't want to know and back then, I probably REALLY wouldn't want to know.
 
Redress said:
Yes I am going to tell you that. I served from 87-93, and every barracks I stayed in after boot camp had shower stalls.
Click to expand...

You remember every shower room you were ever in?
 
I wonder what this will do to recruiting?
 
Ockham said:
Benning didn't in '86, Dineyland at Knox did in '88 and I don't remember much about the showers at Yokota Air Base for the 2 weeks I was there in 1990. But at the time, if someone was gay they didn't say or show a peep back then. If openly gay members are going to be openly gay, there will be problems... I don't believe the Army has progressed or the Marines have progressed to tolerance of that level. Sure, some individuals will be accepted but I have to think the majority will not. This could tear apart our military. Frankly, I don't want to know and back then, I probably REALLY wouldn't want to know.
Click to expand...

I cannot speak for all bases, only for my experiences. I never past boot camp showered in an open bay type shower. Even on ship we had stalls with curtains. Gays did serve back then, and many of them somewhat openly. I knew of 2 gays in my command when I served, neither went out of their way to hide it, while never actually confirming it. Nobody cared much. Showering was never an issue. It's still not an issue. College kids shower with openly flamboyant gays in communal showers still in dorms. They manage it without any trouble. So do athletes.

There is a total of zero evidence that allowing gays to serve openly would "tear apart our military". Absolutely none. In fact, based on the DoD review and the evidence from other services that have allowed gays to serve openly, there is a mountain of evidence that it will not tear apart our military. To suggest it will is pure emotional rhetoric.
 
I was chaptered out as gay. The whole platoon knew. I still showered openly with them. Only 1-2 of 40 had a problem.
 
Redress said:
There is a total of zero evidence that allowing gays to serve openly would "tear apart our military". Absolutely none. In fact, based on the DoD review and the evidence from other services that have allowed gays to serve openly, there is a mountain of evidence that it will not tear apart our military. To suggest it will is pure emotional rhetoric.
Click to expand...

Yeah well, even back then I wasn't a big fan of the DoD and their evidence. All I can relate this to is my personal experience and I can tell you my platoon wouldn't have looked kindly on an openly gay soldier, period. When you can't trust someone to watch your back - both figuratively and physically, it's going to cause problems. To suggest everything is just hunky-dory with openly gay men in the Army and Marines is pure ignorance. If that were the case, we wouldn't be discussing it and the JCoS and DoD would have dispensed with DADT a long time ago, but we both know that didn't happen.
 
SE102 said:
I was chaptered out as gay. The whole platoon knew. I still showered openly with them. Only 1-2 of 40 had a problem.
Click to expand...

When did this happen? What year I mean.
 
Ockham said:
Yeah well, even back then I wasn't a big fan of the DoD and their evidence. All I can relate this to is my personal experience and I can tell you my platoon wouldn't have looked kindly on an openly gay soldier, period. When you can't trust someone to watch your back - both figuratively and physically, it's going to cause problems. To suggest everything is just hunky-dory with openly gay men in the Army and Marines is pure ignorance. If that were the case, we wouldn't be discussing it and the JCoS and DoD would have dispensed with DADT a long time ago, but we both know that didn't happen.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between "hunky dory", which no one is suggesting, and significant unsolvable problems. As the DoD stated, there will be some small short term problems. This is true of pretty much any change in military policy.
 
SE102 said:
Ahh yes, true, I haven't read the whole thread this was only 3 years ago or so.
Click to expand...

Well, that actually lends credibility to Redress's argument that now it may not be such a big deal. It's been 20 years since my active service. I just have a hard time accepting things have changed that much.
 
Ockham said:
Well, that actually lends credibility to Redress's argument that now it may not be such a big deal. It's been 20 years since my active service. I just have a hard time accepting things have changed that much.
Click to expand...


20 years ago I never would have thought gays would be getting married with recognition from the State. A lot has changed in the last 20 years.
 
Ockham said:
Well, that actually lends credibility to Redress's argument that now it may not be such a big deal. It's been 20 years since my active service. I just have a hard time accepting things have changed that much.
Click to expand...

I think this is something the older generations don't seem to understand how little it matters to people in my generation. I think as a generation we have come to the understanding that just because we are in a shower with a gay guy it doesn't mean they are hitting on us. Sure, they may sneak a look, but lets be honest, as straight guys we sneak a look down a girl's shirt when we can.
 
This is for catz.

KittyRifle.jpg
 
soccerboy22 said:
I think this is something the older generations don't seem to understand how little it matters to people in my generation. I think as a generation we have come to the understanding that just because we are in a shower with a gay guy it doesn't mean they are hitting on us. Sure, they may sneak a look, but lets be honest, as straight guys we sneak a look down a girl's shirt when we can.
Click to expand...

And if they did hit on you? Then what?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom