• 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.

  • Yes, do it now

    Votes: 65 67.7%

  • Yes, but after the Pentagon completes it study on the issue

    Votes: 9 9.4%

  • No, do not change the law

    Votes: 12 12.5%

  • No, DADT should be repealed and gays not allowed to serve at all

    Votes: 3 3.1%

  • Other, please explain

    Votes: 7 7.3%
  • Total voters
    96
Le Marteau said:
I think DADT is a dead issue -- it will be repealed within a few years (I severely hope, for the sake of America's social progress. Maybe you'll enter the 20th century sometime soon XD), so why are they still fighting over it?
Click to expand...
I'm under the impression that it's on the way out atm, and will vanish inside a year.

Why are they still fighting over it?

I'm seriously considering the possibility that some of the opponents are simply scared they'll be ass-raped by hordes of male gays. :mrgreen:

Either that, or they truly believe it's "against gods will", and that they somehow can justify forcing others to adhere to beliefs they don't believe in.

Personally, I was taught that homosexuality violates the “will of god”, “the bible”, etc, but I haven't decided if I agree or not. And even if I DID agree, I wouldn't consider it my place to force my beliefs on anyone.
 
The Mark said:
I'm under the impression that it's on the way out atm, and will vanish inside a year.

Why are they still fighting over it?

I'm seriously considering the possibility that some of the opponents are simply scared they'll be ass-raped by hordes of male gays. :mrgreen:

Either that, or they truly believe it's "against gods will", and that they somehow can justify forcing others to adhere to beliefs they don't believe in.

Personally, I was taught that homosexuality violates the “will of god”, “the bible”, etc, but I haven't decided if I agree or not. And even if I DID agree, I wouldn't consider it my place to force my beliefs on anyone.
Click to expand...


No, the issue is simply that the propaganda war between the two opposing sides in your country is so strong and influential that anyone claiming to be political at all MUST side with their party, even on topics that are outdated, Draconic, and befitting of a nation like Yemen.

Which, I might note, is having a civil war between its bipartisan Republicans and Monarchists.

Heh.

Just a thought.
 
Le Marteau said:
I can not begin to comprehend the reasoning behind all the people who answered "no, and gays shouldn't be allowed to serve at all".

Can you give a single reason backed with evidence that homosexual soldiers are any less effective or cohesive in their unit to straight soldiers?

Come on, the US should get out of the 19th century by now.
Click to expand...


Your Avatar might be a reason. Some might still think We need a Military and BTW in Russia or China or Cuba - do Open Gays serve (???)
 
Ned Racine said:
Your Avatar might be a reason. Some might still think We need a Military and BTW in Russia or China or Cuba - do Open Gays serve (???)
Click to expand...
WTH does the "gays or no gays" argument have to do with whether the US has a military or not? Surely you're not suggesting the military will cease to exist if gays are allowed to serve openly, rather than covertly?
 
I support them being allowed to serve openly but I issue an idea for those who dont want them to server. If you dont want them to serve, then dont tax them.
 
Last edited:
Good gravy, yes, let them serve openly....right now. I really don't understand what the big deal is.
 
CriticalThought said:
The four horsemen will be summoned and an Apocalypse will befall all of mankind.
Click to expand...
They'll have to get through our excellent volunteer military first - even the gay ones.
 
Has even one lone Progressive here or on other Forums ever considered that a few among them might be for this BECAUSE they'd like to see the US Military Castrated to an extent ???? Why is it they despite other difference's they congregate on this matter without the mildest suspicion of the Pure intentions of others???
 
Ned Racine said:
Has even one lone Progressive here or on other Forums ever considered that a few among them might be for this BECAUSE they'd like to see the US Military Castrated to an extent ???? Why is it they despite other difference's they congregate on this matter without the mildest suspicion of the Pure intentions of others???
Click to expand...

The idea the military would be "castrated"(LoLz) by letting gays in is hilarious. No, your claim is stupid in the extreme.
 
Redress said:
The idea the military would be "castrated"(LoLz) by letting gays in is hilarious. No, your claim is stupid in the extreme.
Click to expand...



Obviously you chose not to think as you read my entry. You are so hung up on this outlook which I notice is a prevailing trend on this board where Gays are somewhat heavier in number than in the overall society.
 
Ned Racine said:
Obviously you chose not to think as you read my entry. You are so hung up on this outlook which I notice is a prevailing trend on this board where Gays are somewhat heavier in number than in the overall society.
Click to expand...

I thought as I read your entry...I thought it was hilarious. I have never understood how some on the right, those who supposedly support our military(though oddly I find liberals are more likely to do volunteer work for vets, something I take great pride in doing) have such low opinions of our service men and women that they think they cannot handle something as easy to handle as the presence of gays. Something that the rest of the country has managed to handle for some years now.
 
I really don't think I ever said that they couldn't handle it. I just believe that it should not be presented to them as a heavier oddity & distraction that it as presently is. Obviously Gays have always been there and DADT was progress, but that is not enough for some.

My contention is that this is NOT about either Fairness or Justice , but to confront & retaliate against the establishment.
 
Ned Racine said:
I really don't think I ever said that they couldn't handle it. I just believe that it should not be presented to them as a heavier oddity & distraction that it as presently is. Obviously Gays have always been there and DADT was progress, but that is not enough for some.

My contention is that this is NOT about either Fairness or Justice , but to confront & retaliate against the establishment.
Click to expand...

Gays really are not that odd. Most gays don't act much if any different than most people outside of dating/relationship type stuff. The distraction is not really present. If some one is more worried that some one is checking out his ass than what the enemy is doing, they are already a ****ty soldier.

Repealing DADT is not about fairness or justice, it is about doing what is best for our country by giving us the largest possible recruiting pool now and in the future. It is about removing an arbitrary and silly distinction from military service. It is very similar to getting rid of any antiquated law that no longer serves a useful purpose.
 
I really do not believe that the quality in the Recruiting pool will in any way improve if this gets really implemented. On the contrary despite the current rotten economy I think it might accelerate the departure of some who do not appreciate this type of progress.
 
Ned Racine said:
I really do not believe that the quality in the Recruiting pool will in any way improve if this gets really implemented. On the contrary despite the current rotten economy I think it might accelerate the departure of some who do not appreciate this type of progress.
Click to expand...

Historically with services that have allowed gays to serve have not had that problem when gays where allowed.
 
Ned Racine said:
I really do not believe that the quality in the Recruiting pool will in any way improve if this gets really implemented. On the contrary despite the current rotten economy I think it might accelerate the departure of some who do not appreciate this type of progress.
Click to expand...

Do you want people who can't put their country ahead of their prejudices in the military anyway?
 
Last edited:
Caine said:
The problem people fail to look at is that it will create divisiveness amongst units, especially in combat arms where only men are allowed to serve, and often have to share hygiene facilities.
Click to expand...

There aren't too many male only jobs left in the military and the divisiveness will soon be overcome just as racial desegregation and gender desegregation was overcome.
 
mac said:
There aren't too many male only jobs left in the military and the divisiveness will soon be overcome just as racial desegregation and gender desegregation was overcome.
Click to expand...



On a personal Human level I hope you are correct. This still assumes that the motivation here is pure and altruistic. I suspect a lot of it isn't.
 
Dear Le Marteau, the question about homosexuals being less effective as soldiers is amiss. May be they are more effective in combat. This is not a pragmatic issue. Moral issues have long term effects and a point of no return. As they say the mills of God grind slowly but fine. There is a great risk of winning a battle or some battles but literally losing a war with them in the army.
 
Dear Le Marteau, waiting for your reply.
 
Last edited:
Ned Racine said:
Your Avatar might be a reason. Some might still think We need a Military and BTW in Russia or China or Cuba - do Open Gays serve (???)
Click to expand...

Firstly, I don't understand your connexion between gays openly serving in the military and the destruction of the United States Armed Forces entirely -- I hope you'd made a typographical error. If not, and you believe that gays openly serving in the military will destroy the military as we know it, then you're too far gone.

As well, to answer your questions, yes. Gays can openly serve in all of the major, and most of the minor nations on Earth. The simple fact is that, for whatever reason, be it extremist religious tendencies in the States, or just plain conservative resistance to change, the States seem to be one of the few nation that cares one way or the other whether a person is gay or not.

Among the other big-name nations that don't allow gays to openly serve? Iran, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia... Some fine bedmates there, mate.
 
grig said:
Dear Le Marteau, the question about homosexuals being less effective as soldiers is amiss. May be they are more effective in combat. This is not a pragmatic issue. Moral issues have long term effects and a point of no return. As they say the mills of God grind slowly but fine. There is a great risk of winning a battle or some battles but literally losing a war with them in the army.
Click to expand...

In response to this, Grig, I would like to challenge you to find a single survey made by an international or even supranational source that says gays have any effect on morale whatsoever.

The fact that all of the other major military powers on Earth allow gays to openly serve, and have not resulted in the Armageddon nor the dismantling of those armies entirely, ought to be proof enough that your fear is unfounded.

In fact, I might go so far as to argue that in recent years, some other nations have been more militarily successful in their endeavours than the US has. If you want to continue correlating military success and gays openly serving, how, pray tell, do you explain that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom