• 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

Your Star said:
Equal rights is something everyone should be passionate about.
Click to expand...

Equal rights in the military are up to the military to decide, not someone outside. Our military isn't going to implode regardless of the outcome. This law has been in effect since 1993 so why now all of a sudded this passion? You want to serve in the military, does so but keep quiet about your sexuality.
 
X Factor said:
In other words, pay no attention to those troops. ;)
Click to expand...

Wrong, pay attention to the scientific poll of the troops, not the one that is not scientific and has severe flaws in methodology and reliability.
 
roguenuke said:
I would have preferred that no rules against gays serving had ever been put into place. I have wanted this for a long time, since even before I joined the military. It is not like I just suddenly decided to jump on a band wagon here. But it is being fought for so hard right now, because there is a good chance that it can get repealed right now, as it should be. There is still a chance that it could be repealed in the next 2 years, but the best chance to get it done is now. It would mean one less issue that either side is fighting about too.
Click to expand...

My bet is you were very young when this passed in the first place but the fact remains it has been in place for 17 years. What problems has it cost in those 17 years? Sounds to me like just another radical cause by a bunch of malcontents.
 
Conservative said:
It has been the law since 1993 so tell me why now there is such passion for repeal? Radical passion is indeed fascinating as there is no personal benefit or harm on either side for most of those with that passion.
Click to expand...

Because opinions on the topic have shifted to the point where it is feasible and safe to do the right thing.
 
Conservative said:
My bet is you were very young when this passed in the first place but the fact remains it has been in place for 17 years. What problems has it cost in those 17 years? Sounds to me like just another radical cause by a bunch of malcontents.
Click to expand...

Or it could be people who think this is the right thing to do for moral, ethical and the longterm good of the military, while those opposed are just doing it out of an inability to handle certain segments of society that make them feel funny. See how easy it is to dismiss other people like you did?
 
Conservative said:
My bet is you were very young when this passed in the first place but the fact remains it has been in place for 17 years. What problems has it cost in those 17 years? Sounds to me like just another radical cause by a bunch of malcontents.
Click to expand...

i see, desiring equal rights is somehow being a malcontent.
 
Ockham said:
Why were they discharged - do you have an example?
Click to expand...

One, that I know of, was discharged because she choose to out herself. She was tired of being afraid that the wrong person would find out she was gay and have enough clout to get her discharged. Along with that, she wanted more for her partner. She had to work with people who were married and receiving benefits for their partners, while her partner could not be given those same benefits because some people don't approve of her relationship. She found a better job that actually did provide benefits for her partner. I talked to her before she actually left the ship. She told me that she would have stayed in if the military would just treat her like they do the straight people. It is sad and wrong that our government discriminates against people because others do not approve of their relationships.
 
Redress said:
Because opinions on the topic have shifted to the point where it is feasible and safe to do the right thing.
Click to expand...

No, IMO it has shifted only to the point that the malcontent radicals just want another issue to whine and complain about. These radicals need to get a job. DADT has been in effect for 17 years and hasn't caused any major problems. There are a lot more important issues than this. DADT is dead for the next two years.
 
Redress said:
Wrong, pay attention to the scientific poll of the troops, not the one that is not scientific and has severe flaws in methodology and reliability.
Click to expand...
Did you know there are liberals that argue that troops shouldn't even be allowed to vote? Just an aside.
 
liblady said:
i see, desiring equal rights is somehow being a malcontent.
Click to expand...

Yep, when it involves the all volunteer military and doesn't affect you. Your rights aren't being usurped. If you don't like the policy don't enlist.
 
Conservative said:
My bet is you were very young when this passed in the first place but the fact remains it has been in place for 17 years. What problems has it cost in those 17 years? Sounds to me like just another radical cause by a bunch of malcontents.
Click to expand...

I think those who have served with distinction and honor, but have been discharged via this policy, might differ in their opinion. It's certainly caused them problems.
 
Conservative said:
My bet is you were very young when this passed in the first place but the fact remains it has been in place for 17 years. What problems has it cost in those 17 years? Sounds to me like just another radical cause by a bunch of malcontents.
Click to expand...

I was 13. Old enough to know that it was a compromise that was still not completely fair.

A person fighting for equality will always be considered a "malcontent" by those who are fighting to keep bigotry and discrimination in place.
 
Conservative said:
Yep, when it involves the all volunteer military and doesn't affect you. Your rights aren't being usurped. If you don't like the policy don't enlist.
Click to expand...

gays should have the right to enlist and serve openly. i'm sorry you don't see it that way.
 
X Factor said:
Did you know there are liberals that argue that troops shouldn't even be allowed to vote? Just an aside.
Click to expand...

The troops should have just as much say in public policy as any one else. Active duty and vets(and I am a vet) do not get an extra voice in making policy. I supported, as did many liberals, the DoD doing an investigation into repealing DADT. That part is done now. The DoD(ie, the military) has determined that it is safely doable to repeal DADT.
 
X Factor said:
Did you know there are liberals that argue that troops shouldn't even be allowed to vote? Just an aside.
Click to expand...

Why do people insist on all these labels?

And there are also some Republicans who would disenfranchise our troops as well, if they had their way.

Personally, I believe that only people who have done some form of military or civil service should be allowed to vote or hold office, but that's just me.
 
Conservative said:
Yep, when it involves the all volunteer military and doesn't affect you. Your rights aren't being usurped. If you don't like the policy don't enlist.
Click to expand...

Equal protection does exist in the military. Under DADT, equal protection does not exist for one segment of the serving population. The all volunteer military is a red herring.
 
roguenuke said:
Why do people insist on all these labels?

And there are also some Republicans who would disenfranchise our troops as well, if they had their way.

Personally, I believe that only people who have done some form of military or civil service should be allowed to vote or hold office, but that's just me.
Click to expand...

I would not go that far, though I could support a mandatory service of two years, either military or civil for voting rights.
 
roguenuke said:
I was 13. Old enough to know that it was a compromise that was still not completely fair.

A person fighting for equality will always be considered a "malcontent" by those who are fighting to keep bigotry and discrimination in place.
Click to expand...

In 1993 Bill Clinton was President and the Democrats controlled Congress. It worked for 17 years and it is going to be in place another 2 years at least. I am sorry for you but that is reality.
 
Redress said:
Equal protection does exist in the military. Under DADT, equal protection does not exist for one segment of the serving population. The all volunteer military is a red herring.
Click to expand...

As stated it has been law for 17 years and affects an ALL VOLUNTEER military. No one forces anyone to enlist and if someone doesn't like the policy then don't enlist.
 
Redress said:
There is a serious flaw with the poll. The respondents where self selected from among those who read the Military Times. Just thought you might like to know. It's not a scientific poll.
Click to expand...
Most polls have some element of "self selection"
 
How in the world did we win WW2 without openly gay soldiers?

It's a miracle.
 
Redress said:
More information on the Military Times poll: it starts with questions about sexual harassment by gays, then goes and asks opinions on repealing DADT.
Click to expand...
This is not true. There are no questions "about sexual harassment by gays" whatsoever.
 
Conservative said:
It has been the law since 1993 so tell me why now there is such passion for repeal?
Click to expand...

Remember, Jim Crow laws were repealed many decades after they were originally passed. Opinions change. People change. Cultures become more open to this change. Welcome to the 21st century. Most Americans no longer fear homos.
 
Erod said:
How in the world did we win WW2 without openly gay soldiers?

It's a miracle.
Click to expand...

First of all, how do you know that there weren't any openly gay soldiers in WW2 and that some of those soldiers didn't do very brave and heroic acts?

Second, it is not that allowing gays to serve openly will somehow make us able to win every war or even a much better fighting force. It is the fact that allowing gays to serve openly will actually be standing by the US ideals of freedom and democracy for all (not just heterosexuals) and it will actually show that the military really is fighting intolerance within its ranks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom