• 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!

House approves repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell'(edited)

GPS_Flex said:
Ughh...Whatever. I made my point clear: The lawsuits that will follow if this isn't done right will cripple the US military.

I just don’t see why this law needs to be shoved through right now without checks and balances that will protect our military force.

I honestly don’t give a crap about why cross dressers do what they do. Neither do most soldiers. It isn't a social network you know?
Click to expand...

As has been stated, there are more likely to be lawsuits if the rule isn't repealed by Congress. Military members, actually in the military, are not allowed to sue the federal government. Once they get out, they can if they have a case of wrongful discharge or something else.

And I was pointing out to you that since not all crossdressers are gay and there is no actual rule against someone being in the military and being a crossdresser off duty, then why haven't we already seen lawsuits for men in the military to get breast implants? It doesn't make any sense that they would suddenly start after DADT is repealed, unless you somehow believe that there are really that many gay crossdressers in or trying to join the military who would actually insist that they are entitled to breast implants. I believe there are many people who would not support giving anyone breast implants (with the possible exception of reconstructive surgery after some accident or medical issue).
 
CriticalThought said:
SCOTUS will tie on it since Kagan will stand out. It'll be the Appeals court ruling that will decide it. And if you were a Senator who genuinely cared about the military then you would repeal it. It sounds like you wuold be a Senator more concerned politics.
Click to expand...

No way will there be a tie.........The SCOTUS will uphold DADT by a 5 to 4 vote with Kennedy rendering the deciding vote,,,,,,,,,,,,
 
Navy Pride said:
No way will there be a tie.........The SCOTUS will uphold DADT by a 5 to 4 vote with Kennedy rendering the deciding vote,,,,,,,,,,,,
Click to expand...

Navy, it can't be 5-4 since Kagan will have to recuse herself. Best to stop while you are behind sir.
 
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....
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
Actually if it makes it to a vote, it has a very good chance of passage. 5 Republicans have openly supported repeal of DADT and voted against it due to other reasons.

By the way, there will be rules in place, and the bill gives the military time to get ready for the change.
Click to expand...

A good chance of passing, definitely, but I wouldn't put it past GOP senators to say they're in favor of something, and say "oh I swear I'm only voting against it for procedural/whateverbull****Ijustmadeup reasons", and then when it comes time they go lock-step with their compatriots.

See: John McCain's repeatedly moving goalposts.
 
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...

Why can't we?
 
Deuce said:
A good chance of passing, definitely, but I wouldn't put it past GOP senators to say they're in favor of something, and say "oh I swear I'm only voting against it for procedural/whateverbull****Ijustmadeup reasons", and then when it comes time they go lock-step with their compatriots.

See: John McCain's repeatedly moving goalposts.
Click to expand...

I am not counting my chickens till it's done.
 
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...

Do you support straight soldiers walking around holding hands and kissing in public while in the military?
 
Deuce said:
Do you support straight soldiers walking around holding hands and kissing in public while in the military?
Click to expand...

So long as they can do the job I'm paying them to do, then I don't give a **** what they do in their private life (well so long as it isn't too illegal...like trafficking orphans or something like that).
 
Deuce said:
Do you support straight soldiers walking around holding hands and kissing in public while in the military?
Click to expand...

If heterosexuals are allowed to do it, then homosexuals should be allowed to do it as well. That said, I am pretty sure that PDA is strongly discouraged among straight folk while actively serving in the military, and as long as that is the case, then I think homosexuals are no more likely to break that taboo than heterosexuals.
 
Deuce said:
Do you support straight soldiers walking around holding hands and kissing in public while in the military?
Click to expand...

Now, granted, I left the Navy decades ago, and things might have changed. We were told no signs of affection while in uniform, except the obvious cases of departure/returns from tours of duty.
 
Redress said:
Navy, it can't be 5-4 since Kagan will have to recuse herself. Best to stop while you are behind sir.
Click to expand...

Well if she does that it will be 5-3 in favor of upholding DADT...That is even better.........Thanks Redress.......
 
UtahBill said:
Now, granted, I left the Navy decades ago, and things might have changed. We were told no signs of affection while in uniform, except the obvious cases of departure/returns from tours of duty.
Click to expand...

It's only regulation in the Marine Corps(I think...just one branch anyway), but strongly frowned upon in all. The DoD report actually talks about PDAs a bit.
 
Navy Pride said:
Well if she does that it will be 5-3 in favor of upholding DADT...That is even better.........Thanks Redress.......
Click to expand...

You did not know that Kagan would have to recuse yourself, but still feel qualified to make a prediction despite showing a lack of knowledge of SCOTUS?
 
Redress said:
You did not know that Kagan would have to recuse yourself, but still feel qualified to make a prediction despite showing a lack of knowledge of SCOTUS?
Click to expand...

I had heard some rumors to that effect but had not heard her say she will do that....Have you?
 
Navy Pride said:
I had heard some rumors to that effect but had not heard her say she will do that....Have you?
Click to expand...

Yes, she will have to. She already did so in the appeal on the stay order from the Log Cabin Republicans case.
 
Honestly, I have no doubt that this will get filibustered into oblivion and any republican senator who breaks ranks will catch a lot of flack.
 
Redress said:
Why can't we?
Click to expand...

Gays demonstrating affection publicly, is like a person who has a severe speech impediment, volunteering to give public speeches about the proper enunciation of syllables when fluently speaking in public.

Homosexuality is not a normal condition, no more than speaking with a lisp is a normal condition. However, both behaviors should be tolerated and most certainly not penalized, as neither are detrimental to society at large.
 
Hancock said:
Gays demonstrating affection publicly, is like a person who has a severe speech impediment, volunteering to give public speeches about the proper enunciation of syllables when fluently speaking in public.

Homosexuality is not a normal condition, no more than speaking with a lisp is a normal condition. However, both behaviors should be tolerated and most certainly not penalized, as neither are detrimental to society at large.
Click to expand...

Well that is an entertaining point of view.
 
Hancock said:
Gays demonstrating affection publicly, is like a person who has a severe speech impediment, volunteering to give public speeches about the proper enunciation of syllables when fluently speaking in public.

Homosexuality is not a normal condition, no more than speaking with a lisp is a normal condition. However, both behaviors should be tolerated and most certainly not penalized, as neither are detrimental to society at large.
Click to expand...

It's very big of you to tolerate those with speech impediments. Very big.
 
Kelzie said:
It's very big of you to tolerate those with speech impediments. Very big.
Click to expand...

It's not about me, personally! It's about society and how it behaves towards others. It's about minority groups and how they are received by society at large. It's about how we all interact together, in the most healthful and helpful manner possible without anyone losing rights or privileges as a result.

I have a cousin who speaks with a severe lisp. While he is both intelligent, talkative, and surprisingly articulate, some words he attempts to say, just sound comical. It's all we as family can do, NOT to laugh!

I know, it both sounds stupid and is stupid, but that's just how the human species is packaged.

Sorry!
 
Last edited:
Hancock said:
It's not about me, personally! It's about society and how it behaves towards others. It's about minority groups and how they are received by society at large. It's about how we all interact together, in the most healthful and helpful manner possible without anyone losing rights or privileges as a result.

I have a cousin who speaks with a severe lisp. While he is both intelligent, talkative, and surprisingly articulate, some words he attempts to say, just sound comical. It's all we as family can do, NOT to laugh!

I know, it both sounds stupid and is stupid, but that's just how the human species is packaged.

Sorry!
Click to expand...

But homosexuality isn't a negative condition... Or something that should only be tolerated. It should be accepted, and I don't see any reason why it shouldn't.
 
Hancock said:
It's not about me, personally! It's about society and how it behaves towards others. It's about minority groups and how they are received by society at large. It's about how we all interact together, in the most healthful and helpful manner possible without anyone losing rights or privileges as a result.

I have a cousin who speaks with a severe lisp. While he is both intelligent, talkative, and surprisingly articulate, some words he attempts to say, just sound comical. It's all we as family can do, NOT to laugh!

I know, it both sounds stupid and is stupid, but that's just how the human species is packaged.

Sorry!
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that the human species is packaged to regard open affection between homosexuals as disturbing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom