• 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!

'Don't ask' repeal fails in Senate

Conservative said:
Seems like a relative few believe this is a bad law and it certainly isn't at the top of the majority's agenda which is more about jobs and economic growth, not DADT
Click to expand...

Of course you can't prove that it's a "relative few" that believe this is a bad law.

Did you know you have a 132 posts in this thread now? That kinda hurts your "this is not a significant issue" argument.
 
Conservative said:
Right, it is an issue for the LGTG group but not the majority in this country. 2005-2007 was 12-14 years after passage. It is 2010 now. I asked you what happens if you are wrong on this issue and I get silence, then more of the same. This is an all volunteer military and no one has to serve. If there was a draft then you would have a point, but until the courts or the Congress/military leaders act you have nothing.
Click to expand...

You got silence because the powers that be have already established it can be done successfully. If you don't believe them, I doubt anything any of us can say will change your mind.
 
roguenuke said:
And almost everyone in the military is uncomfortable about having to do something in the military. The military does not have to accomodate everyone's comfort levels. How many people do you think are comfortable having to pee in front of someone else for a drug test? How many people do you think are comfortable having to watch others pee for a drug test (and in the Navy it is not just MAs who have to observe, I have observed for other women many times because I was the only woman of a certain rank available to do so, active and reserve)? And there are plenty of women and men who are uncomfortable with their own bodies to be comfortable showering in front of anyone, no matter what the sexuality of anyone in the shower. Those people don't get a choice to shower alone, when there are only communal showers, just because they are uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

No, but soldiers have certain rights and that, they can't be denied. Those rights are in writing and already established.
 
Dammit, it happened again...

You guys post too fast, I'd have to go without sleep to keep up.

So...

Still arguing the whole DADT thing, or did we go off topic?

Personally, at the people who think (I read a few posts) getting rid of DADT and other such restrictions would impact our military negatively...

Several things.

First, if anyone is in a position to absorb a slight decrease in military quality, it's us, who have the best military in the world.

Second, I don't think it will cause anywhere NEAR the amount of problems the opponents of removing it seem to think.

Idea: Test implementation of whatever setup they come up with to remove these restrictions in several commands located in non-critical (or at least less critical) areas.

IF thinks get really screwy, well...

Note: Keep an eye on transfer requests, etc. If people are really not into working with openly gay persons, they will probably try to transfer out of those commands? Not sure how that works exactly...
 
Kelzie said:
Well, assuming he was no longer in the service.
Click to expand...

Again, slice however you want, and he's still in the wrong.



Not quite the same thing. The military implementing a new policy is not taking sides.
Click to expand...

Actaully, it is. If the military implemented a racial segregation policy, it would be taking a side.
 
independent_thinker2002 said:
Of course you can't prove that it's a "relative few" that believe this is a bad law.

Did you know you have a 132 posts in this thread now? That kinda hurts your "this is not a significant issue" argument.
Click to expand...

As you stated I have had what 100 of them which of course is an exaggeration.
 
apdst said:
Again, slice however you want, and he's still in the wrong.


Actaully, it is. If the military implemented a racial segregation policy, it would be taking a side.
Click to expand...

Indeed. And yet when it institutes a desegregation policy, it's not. Funny how that works. Unless you disagree with them desegregating blacks?
 
Kelzie said:
Indeed. And yet when it institutes a desegregation policy, it's not. Funny how that works. Unless you disagree with them desegregating blacks?
Click to expand...

Not at all. Kinda glad they did. I don't think I would have enjoyed serving in all black unit.
 
Kelzie said:
You got silence because the powers that be have already established it can be done successfully. If you don't believe them, I doubt anything any of us can say will change your mind.
Click to expand...

My sincere hope is that if it is repealed that it works. If it doesn't, which liberals never admit can happen, we are in one helluva mess. In a large military like ours with 66000 gay or lesbians I fear that it puts into jeopardy their safety and security plus opens the military up to some massive legal battles. I asked on this thread the worse thing that can happen and no one has responded. how about you?
 
Conservative said:
Right, it is an issue for the LGTG group but not the majority in this country. 2005-2007 was 12-14 years after passage. It is 2010 now. I asked you what happens if you are wrong on this issue and I get silence, then more of the same. This is an all volunteer military and no one has to serve. If there was a draft then you would have a point, but until the courts or the Congress/military leaders act you have nothing.
Click to expand...

Do I really need to link back to when the law was made to prove that some people have opposed it all along? Public opinion on the law has changed over time. That happens. When the law was first passed, the reason it was implemented was because there was not support enough to fully repeal the ban on gays. Now there is, with senators voting against it only because they where holding everything hostage to the tax cut bill.

There is no evidence at all that I am wrong in what will happen. All evidence points to minor, solvable problems that will not have a significant impact on the ability of our military. If we decide to not do anything that might have negative consequences, we would not do anything at all. No problem is unsolvable.
 
apdst said:
Not at all. Kinda glad they did. I don't think I would have enjoyed serving in all black unit.
Click to expand...

So how is one sort of desegregation not choosing sides, but another is?
 
Redress said:
Do I really need to link back to when the law was made to prove that some people have opposed it all along? Public opinion on the law has changed over time. That happens. When the law was first passed, the reason it was implemented was because there was not support enough to fully repeal the ban on gays. Now there is, with senators voting against it only because they where holding everything hostage to the tax cut bill.

There is no evidence at all that I am wrong in what will happen. All evidence points to minor, solvable problems that will not have a significant impact on the ability of our military. If we decide to not do anything that might have negative consequences, we would not do anything at all. No problem is unsolvable.
Click to expand...

I am waiting for you to think for a change and tell me what is the worst thing that you believe could happen with the repeal of DADT?
 
Kelzie said:
So how is one sort of desegregation not choosing sides, but another is?
Click to expand...

Where did I say it was? I've never once suggested that gays and straights serve in segregated units.
 
Conservative said:
My sincere hope is that if it is repealed that it works. If it doesn't, which liberals never admit can happen, we are in one helluva mess. In a large military like ours with 66000 gay or lesbians I fear that it puts into jeopardy their safety and security plus opens the military up to some massive legal battles. I asked on this thread the worse thing that can happen and no one has responded. how about you?
Click to expand...

I don't know. Nuclear holocaust? Civil war? That's a ridiculous questions. Again, the DoD has established no long term harm will come to our military. If you can't trust them, I'm not going to be able to convince you otherwise.

It's not just liberals either. 60%+ of the military thinks it will work. I promise there's not that many liberals in the military.
 
apdst said:
Where did I say it was? I've never once suggested that gays and straights serve in segregated units.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I'm being unclear. You said that the military repealing DADT would be an example of it picking sides. Why does that same rationale not apply to the desegregation of blacks?
 
Conservative said:
I am waiting for you to think for a change and tell me what is the worst thing that you believe could happen with the repeal of DADT?
Click to expand...

The worst? There will be some disciple problems at first, that is pretty much a sure thing. I don't think they will be bad and there is no evidence that it will be. There will be some gays enlisting who really shouldn't, and those will make trouble, but this is true of straits too to an extent(note to our gay friends: if you are the type to attend gay pride parades in assless chaps...don't enlist).

The worst would be poor leadership not cracking down consistently on any of the problems that result from repeal. Weak, inconsistent leadership always creates problems, and DADT has a history of uneven enforcement.
 
Kelzie said:
Perhaps I'm being unclear. You said that the military repealing DADT would be an example of it picking sides. Why does that same rationale not apply to the desegregation of blacks?
Click to expand...

I said that both would be, "picking sides", with a political issue.
 
apdst said:
No, but soldiers have certain rights and that, they can't be denied. Those rights are in writing and already established.
Click to expand...

I have yet to see any right in writing that says that I cannot be made to shower with people that may be attracted to me or even who I may be attracted to anywhere in any of the contracts that I have signed nor have I seen this in any of the training that I have had. The military does not automatically assume that everyone is straight.

And, if the military wanted to change its rules on women and men berthing/showering together it could do so without violating anyone's rights. They most likely won't do this, because it is highly likely to cause major issues, because of the high probability of mutual attraction between groups of men and women who are mostly heterosexual.
 
roguenuke said:
I have yet to see any right in writing that says that I cannot be made to shower with people that may be attracted to me or even who I may be attracted to anywhere in any of the contracts that I have signed nor have I seen this in any of the training that I have had. The military does not automatically assume that everyone is straight.
Click to expand...



Look at AR 600-20 and you'll find it.

It's a fact, that females can't be forced to share billets with male soldiers. Anyone that has been in any branch of the military, will confirm that for you. That same policy will be applicable to gay and straight soldiers, as well.

And, if the military wanted to change its rules on women and men berthing/showering together it could do so without violating anyone's rights. They most likely won't do this, because it is highly likely to cause major issues, because of the high probability of mutual attraction between groups of men and women who are mostly heterosexual.
Click to expand...

Ain't gonna happen. I thought you said you deal with the real world. Wasn't that you? Well, in the real world, the military isn't going to be able to force straight soldiers to share billets and vice-versa. Ask you brother and your husband. They'll tell you the same thing.
 
Conservative said:
I asked you what happens if you are wrong on this issue and I get silence, then more of the same.
Click to expand...

Then you and Fred Phelps will feel vindicated.

The working models work. Gays already serve. How knowing about a few of them liking men is going to cost lives is beyond me.
 
apdst said:
Look at AR 600-20 and you'll find it.
Click to expand...

Apparently you can't find it. I asked you to show me where because I couldn't find it and you ignored it.
 
apdst said:
Look at AR 600-20 and you'll find it.

It's a fact, that females can't be forced to share billets with male soldiers. Anyone that has been in any branch of the military, will confirm that for you. That same policy will be applicable to gay and straight soldiers, as well.
Click to expand...

Here is AR 600-20: http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r600_20.pdf

Doing searches on billet, share, shower, none of them show where it says what you claim. Can you find it and quote it for me?
 
The House just passed a stand alone bill to end "don't ask, don't tell" this afternoon. I saw it on C-Span.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom