• 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!

Gays in the Military

Should the law be changed so that gays can serve openly in the military.


  • Total voters
    96
You are linking groups who have minimal contacts and are essentially NOT a threat to this Republic. This includes the few Nutcase type anti Abortion bombers and rare assasins. They pale in comparison to threats financed from abroad by Islamic Radicals.

I suspect your animosity towards the Right Wing - in any form - allows you to not focus on the serious possibilities that have been occasionally realized here inside the US going back as far as 1990 with the Murder of Meir Kashane in NYC by a Muslim extremist.

As I've said before, I detest extremism whether it is from Christians or Muslims. But you have such an animosity towards gay groups that I thought I would bring you back to reality by pointing out that gay groups don't have a history of bombings, terrorism, and murder like some in the Christian Identity Movement have.
 
I did. I took alot of **** for it, but I gave alot back(ie when Clinton beat Bush in 92, I had a lot of fun).

And that is precisely what the military doesn't want. The military is the most collectivist entity in this entire country, and it should be. A large, iron mallet is worthless if the tiny molecules are not solidified.

No the military does not force people to keep quiet about their personal life, unless they are gay. Discussions about the annoying thin g your boy/girlfriend, husband/wife did yesterday abounded.

I'm sure the rules are broken when people of a certain rank are speaking with each other about their private lives. But generally, as a rule, it is not tolerated (nor should it be).

Being openly gay does not mean flamboyantly gay, it means being able to admit to having a same sex relationship, and bringing them to command functions.

I sympathize with the gay movement, but it is still an alternative lifestyle. I'm a pothead. I'm living an alternative lifestyle. I can't simply join the military and expect my commanders to accept and support my pot-smoking lifestyle.

Gays that you see on Queer Eye or the like are both unlikely to join the military, and would not do well if they did join, but they are the vast minority of gays. Most openly gay people are just gay people who don't hide the fact.

If a commander asks you, "are you gay?", then the truthful response should not come with penalties. But again, so long as homosexuality remains an alternative lifestyle, it cannot be expressed openly in a professional setting that degrades all forms of individuality. I'm all for individuality, but the military is the one place where I understand such individualism can be exempted.
 
In response to your message Le Marteau, I would like to add that of course nobody can provide you with a 100% proof or disproof in this matter. In fact it is not the effect of homosexuals on morale in the army in case of major confruntation it is the effect on morale of non-homosexuals having to serve in the army together with them . I mean according to the polls as I understand many people wuold not like it to be that way. And if they are made to serve in the army like that their morale will suffer. I am not talking about minor conflicts. Any sort of people take part in them. I am talking about real confrontations (I wish there were not any). But in that case morale matters much more. Our ideas are different but they are hypothetic. What do you think about referendums? Each country might have a referendum and people would deside on their destiny or fate democratically. IMO that woul be fair.

First of all, all those current servicemembers who say that they couldn't serve with gay personnel without it affecting their morale, are lying. They currently serve with gay personnel, as has every other servicemember for generations. Gays have served in the US military since the Revolutionary War. They probably will continue to serve in the US military, whether the military approves or not.

If there are servicemembers who are absolutely uncomfortable serving with openly gay personnel, then they are the ones who shouldn't be in the military. The military is a place that demands that everyone put their personal feelings aside and do their job, that includes gay personnel and straight personnel who are uncomfortable with the gay personnel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mac
And that is precisely what the military doesn't want. The military is the most collectivist entity in this entire country, and it should be. A large, iron mallet is worthless if the tiny molecules are not solidified.



I'm sure the rules are broken when people of a certain rank are speaking with each other about their private lives. But generally, as a rule, it is not tolerated (nor should it be).



I sympathize with the gay movement, but it is still an alternative lifestyle. I'm a pothead. I'm living an alternative lifestyle. I can't simply join the military and expect my commanders to accept and support my pot-smoking lifestyle.



If a commander asks you, "are you gay?", then the truthful response should not come with penalties. But again, so long as homosexuality remains an alternative lifestyle, it cannot be expressed openly in a professional setting that degrades all forms of individuality. I'm all for individuality, but the military is the one place where I understand such individualism can be exempted.

The military encourages its personnel, at least the straight personnel, to be in relationships, although they prefer the relationships are outside the military ranks. It is not against any rules at all to discuss your personal life with your fellow servicemembers (except when you are in an actual combat situation or you are on watch), unless you are gay. Many of the command events are designed to include military spouses and families. And it is all but impossible to not have some mention of personal lives when you are living with the people you work with for months at a time. You share living spaces with these people, including computer spaces and telephone spaces, which are the most likely places for someone to get in touch with their loved ones. Do you believe that the military would rather servicemembers just work together and not be friends? Because last I looked, friends share information about relationships.

Smoking pot is not a valid comparison with being gay. Smoking pot actually affects your motor and reasoning functions. Unless you have some proof, being gay does not affect any motor, reasoning, or skills functions in any way. There is a valid reason to keep people from smoking pot while serving in the military. Plus, I highly doubt that most people feel that smoking pot is something that isn't a choice. Also, do you actually define yourself by your pot smoking?

The military does not degrade all forms of individuality. In fact, some of our annual training is dedicated to diversity and realizing that people with different backgrounds can offer a greater perspective on situations and help to make improvements.
 
Let’s kick out homosexuals, minorities and women from the military! :peace
 
The second option is like hanging a suspect after a fair trial. :roll:
 
While the Tea-Party movement hasn't gotten to the point of having military backing, if it ever does, it will be even more dangerous to liberty and the world at large than anything an extremist Lebanese group could contact.

In short, absolutely.



This is retarded. Please explain how you arrived at this asinine conclusion.
 
As I've said before, I detest extremism whether it is from Christians or Muslims. But you have such an animosity towards gay groups that I thought I would bring you back to reality by pointing out that gay groups don't have a history of bombings, terrorism, and murder like some in the Christian Identity Movement have.



Possibly you can Search and find any entry here where I linked any Gays with Murder or anything close to it .
 
Back
Top Bottom