• 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

X Factor said:
I totally respect your service, Redress. I just don't think you can really speak for everybody who is serving. Again, gay people are not barred from service. I remember when they were.
Click to expand...

This is not about ensuring that gays can serve in the military, it is about making everyone's service in the military abide by the same rules. It is about eliminating discrimination within the service. It is about ensuring that the military must hold up their standards that intolerance is not acceptable in the military.
 
Redress said:
Well yeah, but the reality is, most females are the right female for that. Most women realize that guys are going to say some things. Women do know when to tune out.
Click to expand...

Again, that wasn't my experience. What few females I had contact with were nothing but trouble waiting for a place to happen. I got an Article 15 one time for cussing and a female soldier simply heard me. I didn't even know she was there, but she was offended and I got burnt for it.
 
roguenuke said:
Um, anyone can complain about jokes that they find offensive. In fact, a person doesn't even have to be gay to complain about such jokes.
Click to expand...

I'm aware. I been there, done that.
 
Your Star said:
It's not an official ban, but it is a de facto ban of LGBT Americans.
Click to expand...

All the more reason to concentrate on the actual ban on gays and stop boo-day'n about ****ing DADT!
 
Your Star said:
Yeah I do. People with who are that thinned skinned don't last long in the military anyway.
Click to expand...
This seems like a pretty flimsy assurance to hang people's career on. In my experience, people who go looking for harassment usually find it.
 
apdst said:
Again, that wasn't my experience. What few females I had contact with were nothing but trouble waiting for a place to happen. I got an Article 15 one time for cussing and a female soldier simply heard me. I didn't even know she was there, but she was offended and I got burnt for it.
Click to expand...

You can't cuss? I wasn't aware of that.
 
apdst said:
All the more reason to concentrate on the actual ban on gays and stop boo-day'n about ****ing DADT!
Click to expand...

The entire thing needs to go away, and gays allowed to serve openly in the exact same manner that straights do. This would mean no punishment or discharges for a police officer seeing a legal marriage license in the home of a servicemember. This would mean no punishment or discharges for someone who is brings their loved one to a command function, and claims that person as their loved one, no matter the genders of the couple. This would mean the same punishment for two men/women found to be having sex on a military installation that is given to a man and a woman having sex on a military installation.
 
I say **** it. Let the courts overturn DADT and let the military go to **** because it wasn't able to implement it on its own terms. Then all these people who opposed repealing DADT will look like even bigger idiots because they didn't act to bring about a controlled legistlative repeal when they could.
 
X Factor said:
This seems like a pretty flimsy assurance to hang people's career on. In my experience, people who go looking for harassment usually find it.
Click to expand...

And a closeted gay person now could find harassment and make the charges now under DADT if they really were looking to charge someone with sexual harassment. In fact, they don't even have to stop with sexual harassment. There are even rules against discrimination based on sexual orientation (ironic, isn't it), so if they wanted to they could claim that someone was discriminating against them based on a person believing that they are gay. As long as they haven't actually done anything to prove that they are gay, they don't even have to worry about being discharged.
 
roguenuke said:
If someone made repeated jokes about Christians, that would be harassment. If someone made repeated jokes about Indians, that would be harassment. But all these require, first, that the person who is offended actually speak up and say something about it, then if it continues, charges can be filed. (Although, when referring to an actual characteristic, it actually isn't even needed that someone ask a person not to tell such jokes, but that should be common sense.)

We had a girl who ticked off the entire A-school class, including me and the other girl in the class, because she was easily offended and wouldn't let the instructors tell any joke that was harsher than "What did the snail say when he rode on the turtle? Weee!" (We ended up having an entire hour of classroom time that was donated to dirty jokes when she had an appointment with the dentist.) And I am being serious. This girl was made fun of a lot behind her back because of her attitude.
Click to expand...
In a way, you're making my point for me. I think it's a lot to ask of 18 year old recruits to have to walk on egg shells like what you're describing. We ask them to do a serious job, they should be able to blow off a little steam without fear of hurting someone's feelers ~ can you tell I'm a little frustrated with the PC culture?
 
Navy Pride said:
You didn't when they had been to sea for 90 days...............The guys in the gay bars are doing the daisy chain thing everry night.....huge difference........
Click to expand...

Only in your fantasies Navy....only in your fantasies....
 
X Factor said:
In a way, you're making my point for me. I think it's a lot to ask of 18 year old recruits to have to walk on egg shells like what you're describing. We ask them to do a serious job, they should be able to blow off a little steam without fear of hurting someone's feelers ~ can you tell I'm a little frustrated with the PC culture?
Click to expand...

I really wouldn't worry about it. It's not that bad.
 
X Factor said:
This seems like a pretty flimsy assurance to hang people's career on. In my experience, people who go looking for harassment usually find it.
Click to expand...


Damn ****ing right!
 
Navy Pride said:
...........I doubt if I could control myself ..........
Click to expand...

The difference between most mature adults and you Navy is that most men and women are sexually mature enough to be able to control themselves....they don't run off and try to boink every person while their spouse is away serving our country.
 
CriticalThought said:
I say **** it. Let the courts overturn DADT and let the military go to **** because it wasn't able to implement it on its own terms. Then all these people who opposed repealing DADT will look like even bigger idiots because they didn't act to bring about a controlled legistlative repeal when they could.
Click to expand...

Actually, the idiots would be all the folks that believe that ending DADT would the solution to everything.
 
Navy Pride said:
You didn't when they had been to sea for 90 days...............The guys in the gay bars are doing the daisy chain thing everry night.....huge difference........
Click to expand...

What is with you and daisy chains? I honestly find it strange that I'm gay and never even heard of it before, and then learned about if from you.
 
roguenuke said:
The entire thing needs to go away, and gays allowed to serve openly in the exact same manner that straights do. This would mean no punishment or discharges for a police officer seeing a legal marriage license in the home of a servicemember. This would mean no punishment or discharges for someone who is brings their loved one to a command function, and claims that person as their loved one, no matter the genders of the couple. This would mean the same punishment for two men/women found to be having sex on a military installation that is given to a man and a woman having sex on a military installation.
Click to expand...

There we go again with serving, "openly". Why can't they just, "serve"? Just, "serving", isn't "in yer face" enough?
 
X Factor said:
In a way, you're making my point for me. I think it's a lot to ask of 18 year old recruits to have to walk on egg shells like what you're describing. We ask them to do a serious job, they should be able to blow off a little steam without fear of hurting someone's feelers ~ can you tell I'm a little frustrated with the PC culture?
Click to expand...

Which has nothing to do with homosexuals. There are homosexuals who insist on political correctness, but there are many more who don't. There are women who insist on political correctness, but there are many more who don't. There are even a few straight men who insist on political correctness, but many, many more who don't. There are even some within all these groups who insist on political correctness on only one issue or a few issues, or in certain situations, but then are some of the first ones to make rude or offensive comments/jokes that don't offend them. Insisting on political correctness is not reserved for any one group of people, but is rather based on certain individuals not being secure enough with themselves or just wanting to be jerks.
 
apdst said:
There we go again with serving, "openly". Why can't they just, "serve"? Just, "serving", isn't "in yer face" enough?
Click to expand...

So a person choosing to date or marry someone of the same sex outside the military is "in yer face"? If a gay person decides to start a family and adopt children with a same sex partner, that is "in yer face"?
 
apdst said:
There we go again with serving, "openly". Why can't they just, "serve"? Just, "serving", isn't "in yer face" enough?
Click to expand...

If I can be "in yer face" with my sexuality by being able to bring up my husband in front of every person in my unit, pretty much whenever I want, then so should everyone else in the military, even gay people.
 
X Factor said:
In a way, you're making my point for me. I think it's a lot to ask of 18 year old recruits to have to walk on egg shells like what you're describing. We ask them to do a serious job, they should be able to blow off a little steam without fear of hurting someone's feelers ~ can you tell I'm a little frustrated with the PC culture?
Click to expand...

Lifting DADT won't force people to not blow off steam, and it's weird that you think blowing off steam= being offensive to LGBT people. But don't you think being nervous about being outed, and kicked out of the military is a bit too much to worry about for an 18 year old that is already doing a very stressful job?
 
CriticalThought said:
What is with you and daisy chains? I honestly find it strange that I'm gay and never even heard of it before, and then learned about if from you.
Click to expand...

I thought he was talking about anti-personel/tank mines, hooked up in a series. That's not it?
 
CriticalThought said:
So a person choosing to date or marry someone of the same sex outside the military is "in yer face"? If a gay person decides to start a family and adopt children with a same sex partner, that is "in yer face"?
Click to expand...

You want to be a soldier, or do you want to sit around and shoot the **** about your old man? It's not a ****ing social club.

Sorry that the world can't be perfect just to suit you, but there it is.
 
apdst said:
I thought he was talking about anti-personel/tank mines, hooked up in a series. That's not it?
Click to expand...

It's apparantly some sort of gay sex act. I haven't exactly lead a prudish existance, but even I hadn't heard of it until he mentioned it on this forum.
 
roguenuke said:
If I can be "in yer face" with my sexuality by being able to bring up my husband in front of every person in my unit, pretty much whenever I want, then so should everyone else in the military, even gay people.
Click to expand...

Simple, create a regulation that prohibits talking about spouses.significant others, period. Problem solved. It's the military. Don't like it? get out, or don't join.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom