• 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!

Marine officer: Gays, straights shouldn't share housing

Navy Pride said:
Col. Margarethe Cammermeyer's
Click to expand...

It's time for Col. Cammermeyer to retire. Her generation has passed and now she is living in the past. She cannot be allowed to drag the military down with her.
 
Navy Pride said:
Well they still would be subject to the regulations of the UCMJ as would straights......
Click to expand...

Are you implying that the Straights wouldn't be able to resist the Gays if sharing the same housing? They would all become Gay, in the absence of women and abundance of hot, gay men, muscles rippling, bars of soap dropping?:lol:
 
Vader said:
It's time for Col. Cammermeyer to retire. Her generation has passed and now she is living in the past. She cannot be allowed to drag the military down with her.
Click to expand...

She must be close to 70........I am sure she is retired......Point is she was a straight woman for probably 40 or 50 years and is now a lesbian...
 
Re homosexual males and STD's, here it is, 2010, and going on three decades after the HIV issue was reproted, and yet homosexual males are still showing much higher rates of serious STD infection than the general population, despite all the ludicrous spin to the contrary.

A data analysis released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention underscores the disproportionate impact of HIV and syphilis among gay and bisexual men in the United States.

The data, presented at CDC's 2010 National STD Prevention Conference, finds that the rate of new HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men (MSM) is more than 44 times that of other men and more than 40 times that of women.

The range was 522-989 cases of new HIV diagnoses per 100,000 MSM vs. 12 per 100,000 other men and 13 per 100,000 women.

The rate of primary and secondary syphilis among MSM is more than 46 times that of other men and more than 71 times that of women, the analysis says. The range was 91-173 cases per 100,000 MSM vs. 2 per 100,000 other men and 1 per 100,000 women.

While CDC data have shown for several years that gay and bisexual men make up the majority of new HIV and new syphilis infections, CDC has estimated the rates of these diseases for the first time based on new estimates of the size of the U.S. population of MSM. Because disease rates account for differences in the size of populations being compared, rates provide a reliable method for assessing health disparities between populations.

"While the heavy toll of HIV and syphilis among gay and bisexual men has been long recognized, this analysis shows just how stark the health disparities are between this and other populations," said Kevin Fenton, M.D., director of CDC's National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention. "It is clear that we will not be able to stop the U.S. HIV epidemic until every affected community, along with health officials nationwide, prioritize the needs of gay and bisexual men with HIV prevention efforts."
Click to expand...

CDC ? NCHHSTP Newsroom ? MSM Denominator Press Release March 10, 2010

Other links:

U.S. Gay Men's Astonishing HIV/STD Rates | The Bilerico Project

Gay Men's STDs Often Escape Notice: Study Reveals Many Infections Undetected by Current Protocol

No stats on homosexual men in the military's infection rates, but you can bet it's much higher than the norm, also, so any BS about military infection rates would have to distinguish between homosexual males and 'everybody else' to have any real meaning.

And of course the 'solution' is always to pointlessly waste yet more piles of money 'educating' them, as if it's actually possible not to have heard of AIDs in the homosexual 'community'.
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
She must be close to 70........I am sure she is retired......Point is she was a straight woman for probably 40 or 50 years and is now a lesbian...
Click to expand...

Or she was a closeted lesbian for 40-50 years.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Please stop using your dogmatic labels against me.

I just happen to think that, believing somehow that gays will have a negative impact on straight soldiers because they live in the same barracks. Is as rediculous as the notion that somehow black soldiers would make white soldiers worse soldiers.

It's old, fearful thinking.

If they're gay, and they're there anyway. Wouldn't it be like, secretly feeding your kid broccoli, and then him eating it. And then you telling him it's broccoli. And then all of a sudden he hates it, even though he had nothing to say before.

Well, it just shows that its prejudice and fear.
Click to expand...
I predicted this would come. Answer me this, then why don't they house the women with the straight men?
 
Homophobic thinking has very little to do with reality. It's simply put, a VERY deep seated fear that cannot be reasoned with.

Furthermore, the more one throws out hateful rhetoric while at the same time, vociferously denying being a homophobe, the more likely the person does in fact, suffer from this mental disorder.
 
The Uncola said:
Homophobic thinking has very little to do with reality. It's simply put, a VERY deep seated fear that cannot be reasoned with.

Furthermore, the more one throws out hateful rhetoric while at the same time, vociferously denying being a homophobe, the more likely the person does in fact, suffer from this mental disorder.
Click to expand...

Yes, when you have nothing, focus on calling everyone who knows the facts 'homophobes' and their pointing out the serious problems with such politicized agendas 'Hate Speech'.

Never mind actually coming up with any rebuttals or even a sane response.
 
Picaro said:
Yes, when you have nothing, focus on calling everyone who knows the facts 'homophobes' and their pointing out the serious problems with such politicized agendas 'Hate Speech'.

Never mind actually coming up with any rebuttals or even a sane response.
Click to expand...

And when you can't dispute the message, kill the messenger.

Right bud?

Have a nice day, as I said, the is no reasoning with deep seated fear and I won't bother trying.
 
American said:
I predicted this would come. Answer me this, then why don't they house the women with the straight men?
Click to expand...

Why don't the exclude the women altogether instead? THAT is the question you need to answer.
 
Navy Pride said:
Good to see some senior officers speaking up on this insanity


http://www.debatepolitics.com/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=130

March 26 2010


CNN) -- The Marine Corps' top officer says he would want to avoid housing gay and heterosexual Marines in the same rooms on base if the ban on gays openly serving in the military is lifted.

"I would not ask our Marines to live with someone that's homosexual if we can possibly avoid it," Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway told a Web site in an interview posted Friday. "And to me that means we've got to build [barracks] that have single rooms."

Some senior members of the military, however, have expressed concern over the impact of the ban's repeal on unit cohesion and morale, among other things
Click to expand...
"i would not ask our marines....." aren't gays also "our marines"?

i believe it's military bashing to assume our armed forces can't handle themselves around gay people. what are they, neanderthals who will lose their minds when in close proximity to jallman? would he "turn them"?
 
The Uncola said:
And when you can't dispute the message, kill the messenger.
Click to expand...

That's your tactics, not mine, obviously. Projection isn't a refutation.



Have a nice day,
Click to expand...

I will, thanks. ...

as I said, the is no reasoning with deep seated fear and I won't bother trying.
Click to expand...

As you said, you have zero, just hubris.
 
Partisan said:
Probably not, but that would be my gut reaction to a perceived assault.....
I see no valid reason for a gay man to 'hit' on a man he knows is straight, and expect no consequences......
Would my reaction be considered simple assault, or would it be a hate crime?....:confused:
There will be a need to draw up acceptable lines of conduct for the individuals on both sides of this issue.....
I apologize if I offended anyone with my gut reaction to an unwelcomed advance......:3oops:
Click to expand...
lol.......so, if you hit on a woman she has every right to break your face?

just because you aren't as attractive as she might require?
 
Picaro said:
Re homosexual males and STD's, here it is, 2010, and going on three decades after the HIV issue was reproted, and yet homosexual males are still showing much higher rates of serious STD infection than the general population, despite all the ludicrous spin to the contrary.



CDC ? NCHHSTP Newsroom ? MSM Denominator Press Release March 10, 2010

Other links:

U.S. Gay Men's Astonishing HIV/STD Rates | The Bilerico Project

Gay Men's STDs Often Escape Notice: Study Reveals Many Infections Undetected by Current Protocol

No stats on homosexual men in the military's infection rates, but you can bet it's much higher than the norm, also, so any BS about military infection rates would have to distinguish between homosexual males and 'everybody else' to have any real meaning.

And of course the 'solution' is always to pointlessly waste yet more piles of money 'educating' them, as if it's actually possible not to have heard of AIDs in the homosexual 'community'.
Click to expand...

Military members are required to have an HIV test at least once every 2 years. Many commands, at least in the Navy, will do one every year when the sailor comes in for his/her annual checkup. There currently are known HIV positive sailors serving on active duty. They are allowed to stay in the Navy, but they cannot serve overseas. (We were told in Hawaii, that there were 2-3 HIV positive sailors working there, but we were not allowed to know who they were, or their sexuality.) Also, the military has annual training on STDs, including HIV/AIDS, and prevention methods to spreading STDs. In fact, just a couple of years ago, some STD questions were on the Chief's exam.
 
Navy Pride said:
You know the answer to that...There are but there are also gays being discharged every day for making unwanted sexual advances or violating the UCMJ........That is a fact.......
Click to expand...

Prove that there are gays being discharged every day for making unwanted sexual advances or violating the UCMJ, Navy. I dare ya. In fact, I dare you to prove that gays average a discharge once a month for making unwanted advances.

Most gays are discharged for either a) they turned themselves in as being gay and signed all the paperwork necessary to get out, or b) someone found out that they were gay because of some mutual relationship between them and a member of the same sex, military or civilian, and turned them in. I knew several people who got administratively discharged for being gay while I was in the Navy, not one of those was because they made an unwanted sexual advance.

Of course, they are violating the UCMJ by just being in a homosexual, intimate relationship. That is why when I say we need to repeal DADT, I include the caveat, to change the laws against homosexuality.
 
Navy Pride said:
If I were stationed on a ship with 300 women and at sea for 90 day dressing, showering, and sleeping with them I doubt if I could control myself..........

That is how it is for gays when they are on a ship with 300 men......I don't even blame them..........I would be a hypocrite if I did........
Click to expand...

First of all, Navy, be honest. You do not actually share a berthing with 300 men. The largest berthing on a carrier only fits about 100 men or so. Most are smaller. Second, you have separate shower stalls on the ship. It is not open bay showering like boot camp. Each person has his own shower to be in, with walls and a curtain.

And when you are talking about smaller, barracks rooms, as this Marine officer does, they might be two to a room, unless you are talking about boot camp, or possibly training, when they aren't in a combat zone. I know the barracks at K-Bay were two man rooms, with their own head. So why exactly would it be necessary to build whole new barracks, when only one person may be uncomfortable with their roommate being gay?

As I've asked before, what would be necessary proof that someone is gay, and should be moved to the separate barracks? A service member will not be required to divulge their sexuality, so if they don't, what would be the point of building an entire barracks for gay personnel, if you only have 1 or 2 that do tell?
 
roguenuke said:
Military members are required to have an HIV test at least once every 2 years. Many commands, at least in the Navy, will do one every year when the sailor comes in for his/her annual checkup. There currently are known HIV positive sailors serving on active duty. They are allowed to stay in the Navy, but they cannot serve overseas. (We were told in Hawaii, that there were 2-3 HIV positive sailors working there, but we were not allowed to know who they were, or their sexuality.) Also, the military has annual training on STDs, including HIV/AIDS, and prevention methods to spreading STDs. In fact, just a couple of years ago, some STD questions were on the Chief's exam.
Click to expand...

I'm well aware of all that. I'm also aware the stats aren't distinguishing between homosexual males' rates of STD infection compared to straight males' infection rates, but the evidence shows that homosexual males do indeed have far higher rates, and unless you have some evidence that homosexual males magically change as a demographic just because they sign up for the military, we can assume the same patterns persist until proven otherwise.

Somebody else posted about the military's 'higher rates of STD's than the general population'; my post was in response to that one. I've seen no evidence that the military as whole has higher STD rates than homosexual males in the general population.

Anybody who has evidence to the contrary should feel free to post it, or cite a text.
 
Last edited:
Any tickle fights on ships nowadays?
 
roguenuke said:
First of all, Navy, be honest. You do not actually share a berthing with 300 men. The largest berthing on a carrier only fits about 100 men or so. Most are smaller. Second, you have separate shower stalls on the ship. It is not open bay showering like boot camp. Each person has his own shower to be in, with walls and a curtain.

And when you are talking about smaller, barracks rooms, as this Marine officer does, they might be two to a room, unless you are talking about boot camp, or possibly training, when they aren't in a combat zone. I know the barracks at K-Bay were two man rooms, with their own head. So why exactly would it be necessary to build whole new barracks, when only one person may be uncomfortable with their roommate being gay?

As I've asked before, what would be necessary proof that someone is gay, and should be moved to the separate barracks? A service member will not be required to divulge their sexuality, so if they don't, what would be the point of building an entire barracks for gay personnel, if you only have 1 or 2 that do tell?
Click to expand...



The person gay would have to say so..........Isn't that what they want anyhow? to serve openly......That might work for the other services but not the Navy and yes I have lived in a berthing compartment about as big as a large living room with about 100 men where the rack you sleep in are inches apart and have seen gays making advances to straights in those conditions, actually was a witness at a court martial of one...........
 
liblady said:
yes, right. you really don't have a clue, do you?
Click to expand...

Why do you lefties always attack the messenger where you have had your ass kicked in a debate? I will never understand that.......Now go kill a baby.......
 
roguenuke said:
Prove that there are gays being discharged every day for making unwanted sexual advances or violating the UCMJ, Navy. I dare ya. In fact, I dare you to prove that gays average a discharge once a month for making unwanted advances.

Most gays are discharged for either a) they turned themselves in as being gay and signed all the paperwork necessary to get out, or b) someone found out that they were gay because of some mutual relationship between them and a member of the same sex, military or civilian, and turned them in. I knew several people who got administratively discharged for being gay while I was in the Navy, not one of those was because they made an unwanted sexual advance.

Of course, they are violating the UCMJ by just being in a homosexual, intimate relationship. That is why when I say we need to repeal DADT, I include the caveat, to change the laws against homosexuality.
Click to expand...

Believe as you like but I was on 1 ship for 4 years prior to DADT and in that time we had about 10 guys discharged for making advance...That is 1 ship, at the time under Reagan the Navy had 600 active ships.........you do the math......
 
Navy Pride said:
Why do you lefties always attack the messenger where you have had your ass kicked in a debate? I will never understand that.......Now go kill a baby.......
Click to expand...

Nothing like a high level, intelligent debate... :lol: ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom