• 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

shades said:
lets see, handcuffing ones self to the white house fence, taping his mouth shut at a news conference.

And before you say he did that after the fact,

actions like this were just brewing inside waiting for a reason to "flaunt" it.

its true with everyone who feels slighted thru predjudice.
minorities, women, gays, whatever, it seems to be a common denominator. Give them a reason, and usually just a single person or entity that slights them, not a society at large, and they soap box it.
Because people like you encourage it.

and the battlefield is not the place for this kind of PC to take place.
Its serious business this silly war thing you watch from afar.

You want to serve, you're gay, then fine.
but stfu and serve, dont "flaunt" it, define that any way youd like if it makes you feel better.
We have generalized it for you, its called dont ask dont tell.
Click to expand...

...well he did do it after the fact. The people who handcuffed themselves to the fence were not active duty, to my knowledge. So your only definition of flaunting it is participating in political rallies and demonstrations? You know members of the military can't do that anyway, right?
 
shades said:
Trust me, nothing has changed since Dont ask dont tell was put into place except pressure from a liberal administration

you're playing PC politics with an established institution

a lot like gay marriage being accepted by a small minority,
but I suppose on that front no one is genuinly impacted
Click to expand...

1) this is no way addresses what I wrote.

2) Things have changed since DADT was implemented. Public opinion has changed, the military is more used to having gay people in it's ranks, the military thinks it is ready for the change, the list goes on and on of things that have changed. One of the biggest changes is that there is a good chance there is enough support in congress to get it passed.

By the way, this has nothing to do with political correctness. It has to do with equal protection and judging people by what they do and not what they are.
 
BWG said:
What's that Yogi used to say...'It ain't over 'til it's over'.


December 16, 2010 10:25 AM
Click to expand...

One more day and DADT is history.......There won't even be a vote and if there was the votes are not there...........The Senate adjourns tomorrow.........
 
Navy Pride said:
One more day and DADT is history.......There won't even be a vote and if there was the votes are not there...........The Senate adjourns tomorrow.........
Click to expand...

If it doesn't pass now, NP, it will pass later. DADT repeal is far from dead for ever, even if it doesn't happen right now. Most likely it will happen in the next few years.

And you keep messing up what I'm pretty sure you're trying to say (unless you've switched to our side). DADT being "history" would be good for our side NP. We are the ones who want DADT gone, and gays allowed to serve openly.
 
roguenuke said:
If it doesn't pass now, NP, it will pass later. DADT repeal is far from dead for ever, even if it doesn't happen right now. Most likely it will happen in the next few years.

And you keep messing up what I'm pretty sure you're trying to say (unless you've switched to our side). DADT being "history" would be good for our side NP. We are the ones who want DADT gone, and gays allowed to serve openly.
Click to expand...

You can't get 60 votes now and you damn sure won't be aable to in January............Having gays serve openly would open up a can of worms like you have never seen before.....Good senior people will leave the military in mass maybe up to one third................There will be a lot of fights especially aboard ship......There will be flaunting of their sexuality by gays.........It will be really bad on the beach off the ship where I believe gays will be assaulted..........It will be a travesty........The military might never recover.........With Gods help DADT will never be repealed in our lifetime............
 
Navy Pride said:
You can't get 60 votes now and you damn sure won't be aable to in January............Having gays serve openly would open up a can of worms like you have never seen before.....Good senior people will leave the military in mass maybe up to one third................There will be a lot of fights especially aboard ship......There will be flaunting of their sexuality by gays.........It will be really bad on the beach off the ship where I believe gays will be assaulted..........It will be a travesty........The military might never recover.........With Gods help DADT will never be repealed in our lifetime............
Click to expand...

well thats a bit overstated,

but I do believe we are all on the same side inasfar as we all believe gays should be able to serve in the military.

the only difference is some of us seem to think it would be best if you didnt talk about it.

unless someone is discriminated against, in which case we should respond accordingly just like we do outside of the military.
 
shades said:
A very liberal twist.

pretend your listening, hows that?

Dont ask dont tell means just that. In the sense that you know the line not to cross.

Again, I am a devout Christain, and mentioning I am going to Sunday prayer over at the Chaplains tent, or saying "thank the good lord" before I eat, or mentioning my church back home is one thing.

Using that I am a devout Christain to gain attention, or to make some kind of unecessary point is another.

I've served with known atheists, known because they once mentioned it in conversation. And thats fine, it's accepted, still a good soldier, trusted, respected.

But if he talks about it in a look at me look at me kind of way,
or claims he wants someone punished because they dont agree with his beliefs then he's got trouble, trouble he asked for.

I'm speaking reality, I notice most liberals, on this subject are speaking of some sort of perfect world that just doesnt exist, on the battlefield, they're kids, for the most part. And teaching them to be PC is not the militarys job. We have enough troubles without worrying if someones feelings are being hurt.

Can you grasp that?
Click to expand...

There's no twist. It's the reality. Homosexuals have to hide their relationships. Heterosexuals don't.
 
Navy Pride said:
You can't get 60 votes now and you damn sure won't be aable to in January............Having gays serve openly would open up a can of worms like you have never seen before.....Good senior people will leave the military in mass maybe up to one third................There will be a lot of fights especially aboard ship......There will be flaunting of their sexuality by gays.........It will be really bad on the beach off the ship where I believe gays will be assaulted..........It will be a travesty........The military might never recover.........With Gods help DADT will never be repealed in our lifetime............
Click to expand...

Navy, you really need to quit insulting our troops like this. Kids aren't scared of gays like the elderly are. If the elderly want to retire because they believe gays are worse than al qaeda, I'd rather they not be in the decision making positions that they hold.

"The military might not recover." :rofl

Let me know when the homosexuals destroy the IDF. Then I'll stop laughing at your absurd statements.
 
shades said:
no one wants them to "hide" anything, but why talk about it
Click to expand...

Because people talk about their loved ones when they are away from them. It's therapeutic and helps them cope. It's really freaking stupid to not allow it. To people afraid of knowing for certain that someone is gay, they are probably going to assume it is the case with the guys who don't talk about relationships.
 
shades said:
no one wants them to "hide" anything, but why talk about it
Click to expand...

Really?

Hancock said:
DADT should not be repealed! It should however be ammended...

For those gays who are outted, but who continue to behave professionally (that means NOT walking around hand in hand with other men or otherwise demonstrating affection, publicly), they should NOT have their service interrupted.

We CANNOT have men publicly kissing one another or publicly walking hand in hand while in the militatry!


Now, if we should ever NOT need a military then, whatever they want to is just fine with me...

PS.

I generally support GLBT issues....
Click to expand...

You where saying?
 
Redress said:
Really?



You where saying?
Click to expand...

listen, let me try this another way.

If you are gay, most soldiers dont really care one way or the other, as long as you are a competent soldier. And in most case's if you have gotten through basic and advanced training you are fit to serve.
You can talk about your loved ones back home, in any context you wish, just as a straight man or woman can.
however, and this is the part you may not like, but its a reality that all the repealing in the world will not change.

You can not walk around camp, or base, or off base in sight of fellow soldiers holding hands or arm and arm or in an embrace otherwise reserved for traditional male / female relationships, OR,
there will be trouble in the way of either ridicule, and or up to being shunned SOCIALLY by at least a percentage of your fellow soldiers.

Now the question is will this ridicule, for lack of a better term, bleed over into effecting soldier to soldier duties most notably on the battlefield?

And I'm not sure we can take that chance, while at war anyway, and have to stop and address these issues by punishing individuals and training them to react differently.

dont shoot the messenger
 
Last edited:
it is quite possible that they got HIV from a woman if they are a man, and most likely that they got HIV from a man if they are a woman.
Click to expand...

It is possible to get HIV from a woman – during normal sexual activity – but it is the least likely way that you can get HIV. There is little chance of blood to blood contact during sex with a healthy woman.

Also, the airman was married.
Click to expand...

I have seen several cases of homosexual men getting married to women.

Any intolerance or discrimination should be dealt with swiftly
Click to expand...

Intolerance and discrimination are the bed rocks of excellence. I don’t tolerate any thing and I am very discriminatory. I don’t tolerate bad service and I only buy the highest quality products. When I was in the USAF I was not the best liked but I was respected and decorated for my dedication to the mission. If something needed done now and needed to be done right the first time I was the one called. The people under my supervision complained but later recognized the value of my work ethic when they were promoted ahead of people who worked at a more comfortable pace.

I was in Thailand for twenty months before HIV arrived and found the Thai women very friendly. I was young and had a lot of white body hair – which is appreciated by the ladies – so I was routinely offered baby making opportunities. I didn’t really want to leave kids behind so I was careful not to do that.

free to say quite openly, as often as you wish, and anywhere you want that you are Christian.

And heterosexuals can do many things that homosexuals are not allowed to do just because they are homosexuals.
Click to expand...

So being a christian is about the same as being a homosexual???

I agree that replacing DADT with queens in drag may cause trouble in the ranks. Let’s say that a homosexual guy shows up at guard-mount in a female uniform and make up?? Do you let him stand guard at a nuclear weapon storage site so that all of the people going in to work can spend their day laughing??
 
shades said:
listen, let me try this another way.

If you are gay, most soldiers dont really care one way or the other, as long as you are a competent soldier. And in most case's if you have gotten through basic and advanced training you are fit to serve.
You can talk about your loved ones back home, in any context you wish, just as a straight man or woman can.
however, and this is the part you may not like, but its a reality that all the repealing in the world will not change.

You can not walk around camp, or base, or off base in sight of fellow soldiers holding hands or arm and arm or in an embrace otherwise reserved for traditional male / female relationships, OR,
there will be trouble in the way of either ridicule, and or up to being shunned SOCIALLY by at least a percentage of your fellow soldiers.

Now the question is will this ridicule, for lack of a better term, bleed over into effecting soldier to soldier duties most notably on the battlefield?

And I'm not sure we can take that chance, while at war anyway, and have to stop and address these issues by punishing individuals and training them to react differently.

dont shoot the messenger
Click to expand...

You are wrong. Holding hands or walking arm in arm is going to bother about .0000000001% of the military, and they already are troublemakers.
 
shades said:
listen, let me try this another way.

If you are gay, most soldiers dont really care one way or the other, as long as you are a competent soldier. And in most case's if you have gotten through basic and advanced training you are fit to serve.
You can talk about your loved ones back home, in any context you wish, just as a straight man or woman can.
however, and this is the part you may not like, but its a reality that all the repealing in the world will not change.

You can not walk around camp, or base, or off base in sight of fellow soldiers holding hands or arm and arm or in an embrace otherwise reserved for traditional male / female relationships, OR,
there will be trouble in the way of either ridicule, and or up to being shunned SOCIALLY by at least a percentage of your fellow soldiers.

Now the question is will this ridicule, for lack of a better term, bleed over into effecting soldier to soldier duties most notably on the battlefield?

And I'm not sure we can take that chance, while at war anyway, and have to stop and address these issues by punishing individuals and training them to react differently.

dont shoot the messenger
Click to expand...

:shrug: And it's really up to the individual how much affection they want to show in public. There are many things that will get you shunned in the military, and if an person wants to pay the cost for expressing that much individuality, it's up to them. That doesn't mean it should be illegal, any more than being openly vegan or liberal in the military should be illegal.
 
Iron River said:
I agree that replacing DADT with queens in drag may cause trouble in the ranks. Let’s say that a homosexual guy shows up at guard-mount in a female uniform and make up?? Do you let him stand guard at a nuclear weapon storage site so that all of the people going in to work can spend their day laughing??
Click to expand...

Just commenting on this last bit, since it is especially stupid. In the military, they have these things called uniforms. They have to wear them on duty. They are gender specific. Your concern simply is not going to happen.
 
Redress said:
Just commenting on this last bit, since it is especially stupid. In the military, they have these things called uniforms. They have to wear them on duty. They are gender specific. Your concern simply is not going to happen.
Click to expand...

really stupid that anyone would think it would. Maybe too much M.A.S.H. and identification with corporral Klinger. ;)
 
Redress said:
You are wrong. Holding hands or walking arm in arm is going to bother about .0000000001% of the military, and they already are troublemakers.
Click to expand...

holding hands and walking arm in arm is PDA, frowned upon by the military whether you are homo or hetero
 
Redress said:
Just commenting on this last bit, since it is especially stupid. In the military, they have these things called uniforms. They have to wear them on duty. They are gender specific. Your concern simply is not going to happen.
Click to expand...

yeah, but according to the arguement some on your side make....wait for it....gender is a state of mind, not physical equipment. what is to stop some guy who thinks he is a woman trapped in a man's body from wearing a female uniform because he thinks he's a she? god forbid we infringe upon his/her civil rights....

I know this is a reach and highly unlikely scenario....but I can see some gender confused person doing it just to make a statement. :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom