• 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

Speaking of regs, have you found that reg that said the opposite sex could not shower together yet? Funny how you never did show that, but are quick to insist on documentation.
 
apdst said:
Why not post the rest of it, so those not familiar with the information can see what it really says.
Click to expand...

You wanted me to quote the entire thing, instead of just the actual directive? What exactly are you talking about, quote the part you think I left out, I provided a link for you.
 
Redress said:
http://www.sldn.org/page/-/Website/The%20Law/The%20Law%20-%20Statute.pdf



Sorry for the crappy formatting, it's a pdf and I am not going back over the whole thing and removing line breaks. Note number 2 and 3. 2 is the one that almost all DADT discharges come from, since 1 is hard to prove and 3 is rare.
Click to expand...



Here's the part that you left out, that proves you wrong.

c. Separation policy. Homosexual conduct is grounds for separation from the Army under the terms set forth in
paragraph a(3). AR 600–8–24, AR 635–200, AR 135–175, and AR 135–178 govern Army separation policies.
Click to expand...
 
Redress said:
You wanted me to quote the entire thing, instead of just the actual directive? What exactly are you talking about, quote the part you think I left out, I provided a link for you.
Click to expand...

You didn't quote the entire thing, only part of it.
 
winston53660 said:
I like your posts I also like Redress' posts.
Click to expand...

Although I disagree with Redress on almost every issue I find her to be fair and most of all she is a shipmate,,,,,,,,,,I can't say the same for DD whose stalking and stale rhetoric has grown old and boring.........I rarely respond to him anymore because when I do I get in trouble besides he never brings up anything new to the table.............
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
Speaking of regs, have you found that reg that said the opposite sex could not shower together yet? Funny how you never did show that, but are quick to insist on documentation.
Click to expand...

Funny how you gave partial docs and chopped off the part tht proved you wrong.
 
apdst said:
What the hell are you even talking about, cuz?
Click to expand...

The hypothetical was that being Jewish in the military was the same policy as DADT. A Jewish service member writes an private email to his Rabbi. His email is hacked by his superiors. They find out he is Jewish. They kick him out. Is that acceptable, or is that only ok for gay people?
And let me ask you another question "cuz." How many gay people do you actually know?
 
apdst said:
Here's the part that you left out, that proves you wrong.
Click to expand...

Never claimed otherwise. What I said is that discharges under DADT are for telling, not for being gay. Almost no one(if any are at all) are discharged for actually being gay.

Actually, last I heard no discharges are being processed currently for DADT violations at all, but that may have changed.
 
Navy Pride said:
Although I disagree with Redress on almost every issue I find her to be fair and most of all she is a shipmate,,,,,,,,,,I can't say the same for DD whose stalking and stale rhetoric has grown old and boring.........I rarely respond to him anymore because when I do I get in trouble besides he never brings up anything new to the table.............
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
Navy, don't do this. Let it go.
 
qwertyuiop said:
The hypothetical was that being Jewish in the military was the same policy as DADT. A Jewish service member writes an private email to his Rabbi. His email is hacked by his superiors. They find out he is Jewish. They kick him out. Is that acceptable, or is that only ok for gay people?
And let me ask you another question "cuz." How many gay people do you actually know?
Click to expand...

Who's email got hacked?
 
apdst said:
Funny how you gave partial docs and chopped off the part tht proved you wrong.
Click to expand...

I linked the whole thing and quoted the portion relevant to the claim I was making. You linked to two huge documents neither one of which said what you claimed, and have yet to show any backup for your claim.
 
Redress said:
Never claimed otherwise. What I said is that discharges under DADT are for telling, not for being gay. Almost no one(if any are at all) are discharged for actually being gay.

Actually, last I heard no discharges are being processed currently for DADT violations at all, but that may have changed.
Click to expand...

You're still wrong. :rofl

If they weren't gay, there wouldn't be anything not to tell...sheeesh!!
 
Redress said:
I linked the whole thing and quoted the portion relevant to the claim I was making. You linked to two huge documents neither one of which said what you claimed, and have yet to show any backup for your claim.
Click to expand...

I posted a part of the same regulation that you posted. Mine was on the next page...LOL
 
apdst said:
You're still wrong. :rofl

If they weren't gay, there wouldn't be anything not to tell...sheeesh!!
Click to expand...

Actually, some straits who want to get out of their contract are using DADT to get a favorable discharge with little fuss.

Further, whether there was anything to tell about or not, it's the tell that gets you the discharge, not being gay.

Some interesting reading for you: http://sldn.3cdn.net/48ee19f69cf2e4d028_54m6bri8u.pdf

Note this comes from a pro-repeal organization, but their primary purpose is to protect gays serving and goes into great detail what will get people discharged and how the process works and so on. Take it for what it is worth, but I have not caught this group in factual errors.
 
apdst said:
I posted a part of the same regulation that you posted. Mine was on the next page...LOL
Click to expand...

I am referring to your claim that there was a regulation against opposite sexes showering together. You claimed it, never documented it despite a couple failed attempts.
 
Redress said:
I am referring to your claim that there was a regulation against opposite sexes showering together. You claimed it, never documented it despite a couple failed attempts.
Click to expand...

I can't find the actual regulation, but obviously it exists, because--in the army at least--males and females can't share billets.
 
qwertyuiop said:
Mike Almy. Is it acceptable? And how many gays do you actually know?
Click to expand...

Of course hacking someone's email isn't acceptable. But, what's your point?

And, what's me knowing someone who is gay, have to do with a ****ing thing? But, to answer your question: **** if I know! I don't care if any of my friends are gay.
 
apdst said:
I can't find the actual regulation, but obviously it exists, because--in the army at least--males and females can't share billets.
Click to expand...

Because something does not happen does not mean that there is a regulation to stop it from happening.
 
apdst said:
Of course hacking someone's email isn't acceptable. But, what's your point?

And, what's me knowing someone who is gay, have to do with a ****ing thing? But, to answer your question: **** if I know! I don't care if any of my friends are gay.
Click to expand...

What matters is that I think that anyone who opposes a repeal of DADT is a bigot. They don't oppose it for practical reasons (because there are none), they oppose it because they don't like gays. My point is that you are saying gays are rapist perverts who want to rape any man they see, but if you knew an actual gay person, you would know its not true.

And my point is, that this is what happens under DADT.
 
qwertyuiop said:
What matters is that I think that anyone who opposes a repeal of DADT is a bigot. They don't oppose it for practical reasons (because there are none), they oppose it because they don't like gays. My point is that you are saying gays are rapist perverts who want to rape any man they see, but if you knew an actual gay person, you would know its not true.

And my point is, that this is what happens under DADT.
Click to expand...

You can oppose DADT repeal without being a bigot. Being wrong does not mean you are a bigot. Some honestly do think that if gays can serve openly it will hurt military readiness. Of course, some people think the world is flat too...
 
qwertyuiop said:
Mike Almy. Is it acceptable? And how many gays do you actually know?
Click to expand...

I will take that one.........I know one, I use to know two but one was the partner of the other one I know and sadly he died frrom AIDS...I went to his funeral........He was a good friend.........His partner is on my golf team............He has a 2 handicap and is the best golfer on our team... (I have a 9 handicap :)) He is Conservative and we discuss politics all the time.........He is not hard core like the liberals here...........He believes that the economy and the deficit are the most important issues we face........He would like to see Civil Unions (as would I) and thinks DADT is fine........He just wants to live his life in peace and harmony and I agree with him..........Oh by the way he is a retired Navy Commander........
 
Navy Pride said:
I will take that one.........I know one, I use to know two but one was the partner of the other one I know and sadly he died frrom AIDS...I went to his funeral........He was a good friend.........His partner is on my golf team............He has a 2 handicap and is the best golfer on our team... (I have a 9 handicap :)) He is Conservative and we discuss politics all the time.........He is not hard core like the liberals here...........He believes that the economy and the deficit are the most important issues we face........He would like to see Civil Unions (as would I) and thinks DADT is fine........He just wants to live his life in peace and harmony and I agree with him..........Oh by the way he is a retired Navy Commander........
Click to expand...

I am sorry for your friend's loss.
So some may support it. And many many many more are against it. And calling us "hardcore liberals" because we support a repeal isn't true. 74% of Republicans want a repeal.
 
Redress said:
You can oppose DADT repeal without being a bigot. Being wrong does not mean you are a bigot. Some honestly do think that if gays can serve openly it will hurt military readiness. Of course, some people think the world is flat too...
Click to expand...

This is true. If you can genuinely support a claim that gays somehow hurt the military, then keeping DADT, or even rigorous exclusion of gays would be appropriate. However, the evidence is overwhelmingly on the other side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom