• 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

Ockham said:
I think that's true to a point but taking away the economic issues will still not make this a much bigger issue which touches every single person in America, it would only touch those who are in or are part of an active military family.
Click to expand...

That is quite an assumption. It's seen by many as a civil rights issue. Furthermore, this is being challenged in the courts which likely means that if it wins on appeal and then ties in the Supreme Court, that the policy will be repealed immediately, and the military will have to implement it without any preparation. The legal challenges will bring it to the forefront in the coming two years.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Wait wait wait a second. America isn't a democracy? Excellent, can you stop claiming to spread it then.
Click to expand...

America is a democracy, the all volunteer military isn't. You don't like the rules, don't enlist.
 
Conservative said:
Yep, that normally happens in a free society where the majority actually make the laws and since this isn't a democracy the rules are DADT.
Click to expand...

We live in a representative democracy. Those elected officials are who determined that DADT was put into place in the first place. Now, the majority of those officials and the people they represent, want DADT repealed. The minority is using special procedures and other political issues to delay that repeal and what the will of the people is. The military would do this, if we were able to get the minority of the elected officials to change the rule that the military is forced to follow.
 
roguenuke said:
Depends on the situation, just like when it comes to women. The rules that are currently in place may not completely take care of all issues, but at least they would be fair. And eventually, the military would figure out the best ways to deal with problems for everyone. And I highly doubt that there will be so many of these incidents that it will be a major problem.
Click to expand...
If you remove DADT, isn't it possible more openly guy guys will join just to be able to live in close to close proximity to a lot of other men? In that case, incidents like I described could become more common. I don't know, just throwing the possibility out there.
 
CriticalThought said:
That is quite an assumption. It's seen by many as a civil rights issue.
Click to expand...
Unless it affacts every single person, man woman and child of this country in a day to day level... like: Taxes, like HealthCare, it's not an assumption at all, it's a fact.

CriticalThought said:
Furthermore, this is being challenged in the courts which likely means that if it wins on appeal and then ties in the Supreme Court, that the policy will be repealed immediately, and the military will have to implement it without any preparation. The legal challenges will bring it to the forefront in the coming two years.
Click to expand...
"Likely" - I wouldn't say that necessarily, but until your dream comes true, DADT stays, and that's just fine by me.
 
Conservative said:
America is a democracy, the all volunteer military isn't. You don't like the rules, don't enlist.
Click to expand...

Doesn't make it right.

The military has says removing DADT would not have a negative impact.

The secretary of the Defence supports that.

The military through the survey supports that.

The American people by poll supports that.

Repeal DADT.
 
disneydude said:
1. misquotes what Obama said. If you want to discuss what was actually said in the context that it was said then I would be happy to engage in that debate. However, here you are just being blatantly dishonest (should have I expected better?)
Click to expand...


So he didn't say that his grandmothers racism was typical of white people?






2. Again...taken out of context, that isn't what Biden said, you have phrased it in a dishonest manner to try to prove a point that you couldn't have otherwise proven.
Try being a little honest and he can discuss it.
Click to expand...








3. As far as Obama's views on marriage, I would put him in the same category as the other bigots that feel the same way. I think that Obama, is bigoted in his view.
Click to expand...

Yet you are almost silent on it, except when prodded. Well kudos for you on this. :thumbs:


4. Same as #4. I think Obama has argued for a bigoted policy. I would note, however, that Obama spoke out against Prop 8 in California.
Click to expand...



So he's only a little bit of a bigot.



So when you state you speak out against any and all bigotry, that was the actual lie in our discussion, not that what I posted was dishonest.


Good, I am glad we cleared that up. :thumbs:
 
disneydude said:
Just more BS. Sure...I think there would be people on both sides trying to manipulate to prove their points.
Click to expand...
Okay, fair point. In either case, repealing DADT seems to be asking for trouble the military just doesn't need.
 
Albert Di Salvo said:
For me it's not about winning because winning is hard to do.
It's about preventing you from winning. That's much easier.
Those are two very different things.
Click to expand...

If you successfully stop someone from winning, that's a win for you, so, contrary to what you stated, it IS about winning, or having your own way.

I want what I want when I want it, as opposed to... You'll get what you get when you get it.

ricksfolly
 
X Factor said:
If you remove DADT, isn't it possible more openly guy guys will join just to be able to live in close to close proximity to a lot of other men? In that case, incidents like I described could become more common. I don't know, just throwing the possibility out there.
Click to expand...

Not likely. First of all, why would they join only when they could be openly gay. They would still be taking a chance of getting the crap beat out of them and/or being killed because someone was not happy about being hit on. How many guys do you think will volunteer for sub duty after they put women on board, just to be able to live in those close quarters with women. Very few, if any, would be my guess.

You are basing your arguments on what might happen, not what is most likely to happen. Poor way to debate. Do you have any evidence that there are that many gay men or women that would join the military just because they could live more closely with people that they might be attracted to?
 
Conservative said:
America is a democracy, the all volunteer military isn't. You don't like the rules, don't enlist.
Click to expand...

America isn't a democracy. We are a representative republic. And if our tax dollars are going to the military, we have a opinion on things like this.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So he didn't say that his grandmothers racism was typical of white people?
Click to expand...

What he is describing is sociologically verified by evidence. Due to the media and other socializing factors, white people typically hold different views of black people, even if they aren't aware that they do. It has been shown empircally that white psychiatrists are more likely to diagnose black people with a mental illness and to prescribe injection medications which can be administered involuntarily. It has been shown empircally that white judges are more likely to sentence black people and give them harsher sentences. It has been shown empiraclly that white teachers treat black students differently than white students. It isn't "racism" so much as an unconcious response to a group that they have been psychologically primed to view as more threatening.
 
Ockham said:
Unless it affacts every single person, man woman and child of this country in a day to day level... like: Taxes, like HealthCare, it's not an assumption at all, it's a fact.

"Likely" - I wouldn't say that necessarily, but until your dream comes true, DADT stays, and that's just fine by me.
Click to expand...

Actually, unless there is some huge change in tax policy, the taxes issues doesn't really affect me all that much.

And, since I am a military spouse, the health care issue doesn't really affect me much either, although I am completely against the Universal Health Insurance.

In fact, not too much does affect me directly. Indirectly, most things affect me, including DADT and same sex marriage.
 
i think his grandmother was a typical white person of her generation. you don't?
 
CriticalThought said:
What he is describing is sociologically verified by evidence. Due to the media and other socializing factors, white people typically hold different views of black people, even if they aren't aware that they do. It has been shown empircally that white psychiatrists are more likely to diagnose black people with a mental illness and to prescribe injection medications which can be administered involuntarily. It has been shown empircally that white judges are more likely to sentence black people and give them harsher sentences. It has been shown empiraclly that white teachers treat black students differently than white students. It isn't "racism" so much as an unconcious response to a group that they have been psychologically primed to view as more threatening.
Click to expand...

I honestly can say this is the largest amount of tripe I've seen since, well a few days actually. Let's go to the "Excuse counter for Obama" and see what your excuses were

Excuse counter:

1. sociologically verified by evidence (no source)
2. it's the media's fault and black people don't know they're doing it
3. empirically - psychiatrists are racists (no source)
4. empirically - white judges are racists (no source)
5. empirically - white teachers are racists (no source)
6. Obama isn't racist - he's just conditioned that way by white people

All that's missing is "It's Bush's fault" or "empirically, Bush is a racist" (no source).
 
ricksfolly said:
If you successfully stop someone from winning, that's a win for you, so, contrary to what you stated, it IS about winning, or having your own way.

I want what I want when I want it, as opposed to... You'll get what you get when you get it.

ricksfolly
Click to expand...

Your point is well taken, but I don't completely agree. What is the universe of possibilities?

1. Your victory. 2. Your opponent's victory. 3. Your defeat. 4. Your opponent's defeat. 5. Stalemate.

If you stop your opponent from winning there are two possible results. One result is certain, i.e., you avoid defeat. The flip side is uncertain, i.e., either stalemate or victory or combination of the two.

Victory usually requires a great degree of effort. Stalemate doesn't require the same level of effort.

Compare WWII with the Korean War.
 
Ockham said:
I honestly can say this is the largest amount of tripe I've seen since, well a few days actually. Let's go to the "Excuse counter for Obama" and see what your excuses were

Excuse counter:

1. sociologically verified by evidence (no source)
2. it's the media's fault and black people don't know they're doing it
3. empirically - psychiatrists are racists (no source)
4. empirically - white judges are racists (no source)
5. empirically - white teachers are racists (no source)
6. Obama isn't racist - he's just conditioned that way by white people

All that's missing is "It's Bush's fault" or "empirically, Bush is a racist" (no source).
Click to expand...

talk about tripe.....i think you've cornered the market.
 
Conservative said:
I am still waiting for you or anyone else here that isn't in the mlitary to explain why this issue is so important to you. Seems that the military disagrees with you.

Military Times Poll: Troops Oppose Gay Agenda for the Military - Elaine Donnelly - The Tank on National Review Online
Click to expand...

That last bit in the article is the kicker:

Military Times said:
Contrary to some disingenuous news reports, activists for gays in the military are determined to impose their agenda on our military. They are working with the incoming administration and pushing hard for repeal. Members of Congress and the new Commander-in-Chief need to take this issue seriously, and see to it that activists demanding repeal of the law do not win.
Click to expand...
 
Conservative said:
then don't join the military
Click to expand...

That's the point though - that's not good enough for them. They have to impose their civillian activist agenda on the military. The minority always wins.
 
Ockham said:
That last bit in the article is the kicker:
Click to expand...

that seems to be the case with just about everything else including economic issues as well. there are leftists here as well disguised as freedom loving Americans but their agenda is clear, they are radical activists determined to impose their agenda on the rest of us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom