Reply With QuoteFree at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are Free at last!
So what are you thoughts on the comments made by SecDef and the CJCS today in regards to DADT?
Originally Posted by Jake the Skillet
Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are Free at last!
The misconception is that gays are not allowed in the military, that is incorrect. They just cannot openly express themselves.
With that said... Can straights? Nope. I can't talk about what my wife and I do in the sack nor can I kiss her in uniform... It's all unprofessional. So are gays (and supporters of them) hoping they can do that?
I just don't get it... They're fighting for the 'idea' of being openly gay in the military, not because they want to get dirty in the parking lot with another dude, but instead they're fighting for it simply to fight for it. It's like most liberals... Don't think before they fight for something, just do like the little lemmings they are.
And what are yours?
This line of thinking is so incredibly fucked up, I'm not quite sure how to respond.
C'mon, I'm a freakin mushroom at work. I'm either downrange--trying to do my job while trying to keep certain units from 4ID from hurting themselves or others, or I'm at my desk--putting out fires from others trying to MAKE their idiotic GFIs work, despite reality in most cases.
What was said?
P.S. I've said this before...I could have had folks of alternate lifestyles in my BN. Didn't bother me, as I wasn't their to train them & lead them into a bedroom--but into combat. If they couldn't hack it militarily, I'd help shite-can them. If they did well militarily, I'd put them in for some sort of recognition. What they did on their off time, with themselves &/or whomever--as long as it didn't end up with me bailing them out of the stockade or the civilian jail, I was content with.
P.P.S. That said, I agree with Un4 somewhat in his statement above, regardless of what those "Suits" said to the general populace. & no, I don't support ANY of our service members being allowed (or forced) to wear PINK berets! (I have to admit, I did steal a kiss or two from my wife a time or two while in uniform. But it was never an overt act, blatant to the public view. Go ahead--call me Old Skool. You certainly won't be the first to do so.)
Frankly, I don't kiss 'n tell. & I don't care who you kiss. Nor do I want to hear about it. Unless, of course, you end up messing with me & mine somehow in the process. THEN, I reserve the right to make Hell seem like Disneyland to ya!
"What you fear controls you. Take charge of your own life!"
Touchy subject. I don't have any issues with it but I don't know how it would be received. Considering how my guys here reacted when they found out that a couple of our terps were engaging in homosexual acts, it's pretty clear how they actually feel on the issue. However when big Army says accept it and drive on, guess what we're going to do.
Pretty sure they aren't asking to buttfuck each other in formation; just for equal rights. I think I read that somewhere. Forget what document says that...
Yea, but that can get complicated. Equal rights would mean recognizing them as "partners," as partners they are entitled to SGLI benefits, healthcare, and all other things that a military spouse is entitled and that can get costly, but besides that how is the Army supposed to give them equal rights when the rest of the Nation can't even agree to recognize their union in marriage.
I'm not homophobic so as long as a gay person doesn't make any advances at me I'm cool but the problem is I know alot of Masculine/Macho Mean that are straight homophobes and have strongly voice their views on gays and the gay community. When this thing does get repealed there is going to be alot of disciplinary action and Soldiers getting into scuffles over homosexuality.
Keep DADT. Too many problems will arise if it goes away. WAY too many problems.
1 P/R Fall 2002
Co. M-16
Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the approach is to try and have congress pass a statute to change this. I dont really see that happening in a substantial way. The more moderate Dems are probably going to back away from pushing to heavily on this (esp after health care and the whole Scott Brown affair), given that 2010 is a midterm election year. Obama can just use this as a way to gain some political capital with the libreals without changing a system that could seriously piss people off .
On action alone be thy interest,
Never on its fruits.
Let not the fruits of action be thy motive,
Nor be thy attachment to inaction.-Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2
I was going to ask the same thing.
Also, are you asking what we think of the policy, or what we think of Gates and Mullen's comments? Cuz those are two separate things.
Man, we should have cloned twenties. Jackson wouldn't have given a shit.
The purpose isnt to allow them to go out and buttfuck/scissor each other in formation, but that they cannot be kicked out due to being gay. Un4, you say you don't kiss and tell, but you do have pictures of you and your wife on your desk and bring her to events. At dining ins you walk in with her on your arm. Doing that is not going to get you kicked out of the military.
You are also able to go on vacation/trips with your wife and not be concerned with a picture of you and her holding each other. Shoot, you recently posted a picture of the two of you on this forum, with your arms wrapped around her. That according to you is perfectly fine, but if it was two females or two males, they run the risk of being brought up on charges.
What they are asking for is the freedom to have their personal life stay personal. Not to have to walk around in fear of someone reporting you to higher because they saw you with someone of the same sex.
and TG, both would be good. You guys understand that I am against any policy that discriminates against a minority (sorry), but I am happy to see a change from within the Pentagon.
And Wes, what type of problems would arise? Would you be afraid to be in a foxhole with someone who was gay?
And I do not think it is going to recognize partners or marriage, just not allow them to get kicked out.
I'm not saying I'm opposed to gays in the military, but they have no reason to want what they want. SGLI and d-gratuity can be given to anyone now. They are getting absolutely nothing out of this other than to say they're gay openly, which by all professional standards nobody has to know. They can't get medicial bennies for their significant other because that would require marriage and I don't think any state has it legalized at the moment.
Someone answer me, what is it that they want?
I have a gay friend, so gay that he's nearly his own gay parade, but anyways, even he thinks other fags (yes, he calls 'em that) are retarded for all these protests and what not. You don't need a rainbow on your bumper, you don't need to fuck in front of the world... Gays are turning this into a political ideal more than love for another person.
On a side note... Obama wants to dismantle the military. Period. He wants that civilian force of his. So what a better way to do that! I don't get it....
Wehre teh hell are you getting that POTUS wants to dismantle the military? Please inform me of this?
And again, what are they getting out of this? The only thing they are getting is the ability to have a picture of their significant other on their desk without getting kicked out.
and again I ask, why is it a professional standard that they have to keep it a secret while you can flaunt the fact that you and your wife have a sex life?
Seriously, thats all you think they want is to put a picture on the desk.There is a saying, "If you give a mouse a cookie, he will evenutally ask for milk...." Thats what the whole gay movement has been about getting everything that a heterosexual couple is entitled to. They are not gonna stop there, they will use that as a basis to legitimize other things the want.
I didn't know marrying women and being in the service automatically meant you were "flaunting" your sex life. If I am not mistaken the Army has a code of conduct for Soldiers while in uniform on PDA. Now there are some couples out there that are loose with it but I'm pretty sure most Soldiers in the Army are pretty conservative about their sex life.
I honestly will never understand the disguist that people have with homosexuality? Some of these same arguements were made for interracial dating and marriage. And what is wrong with them having the right to be with loved ones? Honestly, are gays getting married going to do anything to make your married life any different?
I dont think people really understand how this policy fully works. Someone can face UCMJ actions for making a statment, Act, or Marriage about their HomoSexual orientation. So If a Male Gay Soldier mentions that he has a male significant other, he can face UCMJ. So If someone asks a Gay Soldier if he has a SO, he has to lie or face potential sanctions (which can be quite serious). I do not believe a straight Soldier has this issue. I mean correct me if I am wrong, but would any non-single Soldier on here feel compelled to lie if a Commander (or anyone else in the Military for that matter) asked them if they were in a relationship.
On action alone be thy interest,
Never on its fruits.
Let not the fruits of action be thy motive,
Nor be thy attachment to inaction.-Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2
thanks rkam. That is really the issue. You are forcing people to lie who want to serve. Honestly, are homosexuals less fit to serve our country? Or is it ok for them to serve, as long as they do not be gay while doing so? and dont give me the whole "UCMJ sodomy" thing, because most of the military would be in violation of that.
Sodomy is off the books, check article 120 in the 2008 MCM.
thanks. I remember someone using that arguement a few years ago against gays in the military saying that they openly would violate UCMJ
I really don't understand the slippery slope argument against this. What's their secret agenda? That they want bath houses and glory holes installed in all barracks? Jesus, they're just looking for the same rights that straight people have. Does reversing dadt cause some issues that need to be addressed? Absolutely, but so does any change.
People will eventually get over it, just like they did when the Army let the split tails and the darkies in.
True. Wes, there are/were a lot of people who thought the military was going to go to shit when blacks were allowed to be more than cooks :-) Theres more than white heterosexual males out there that want to fight for this country.
You know, there needs to be some degree of moderation. I say that because of a Soldier I have now. The individual was brought here for mental health concerns and I had to use a somewhat back door counseling option in addition to the traditional system for the Soldier because the person couldn't be straight-forward within the military system- even the healthcare system.
I guess I would like to see some degree of the system along the lines of the current Sexual Assault Response lines (restricted vs. non-restricted). Not saying these are rapes, etc- but am saying that some service members aren't getting the care they need (mental or physical) for the same reason we had (and still have) rapes that go unreported. Collateral misconduct.
Personally, you know what? I'm not okay with anybody's sexuality openly displayed in the workplace. I guess I have some concerns with removing don't ask/don't tell. Part of which has to do with many of the environments we're placed in. When I've gone for training/field the men are housed in one tent/area/separate part of a building. Why? In my book and my personal experience it has to do with personal dignity and privacy of the body- the way someone else looks at you makes day and night difference. For the same reason that I don't change my clothing around men is the same reason I'm not comfortable changing clothing around anyone else who would look at me in that light- and I have had some of those elevator stares before and they are uncomfortable to say the least. Do I think there aren't lesbians in the military? Far from it- but I do believe the policy lends itself to some degree of protection insofar as keeping sexuality separate from work in both genders.
I do believe marriage is one man and one woman. But I also don't believe that homosexuality is a choice. Think refining is more in order on this policy.
More thoughts later. Actual work to do.
"Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all times you can, by all the means you can, as long as you can." -John Wesley
God Send Grace -CUSON
Ok, so will there be different latrines/showers/sleeping quarters for homosexual service members? If not, then why are there for females?
You will also have plenty of cases both deserved and undeserved if the DADT is removed with soldiers saying they didn't get promoted/job they wanted/etc... because they were gay. How do you prove or disprove each case?
And I promise you that there will be beatings/murders/harassment if the policy goes away. It is sad, but it is true.
More later, back to work.
1 P/R Fall 2002
Co. M-16
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks