Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Gays in Military deadhorseFollow

#1 Feb 28 2007 at 7:03 AM Rating: Good
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,112 posts
There are many many people against gays even being there..... but I seldom hear a real reason... other than "they shouldn't be there".
The only decent arguemnt I have heard is that mixing people who are attracted to one another is a bad idea.

Well here's a thought..

MILITARY DISCIPLIN? I mean... What does who or what you stick your **** in have to do with your opportunity to serve your country?
The military has naught to do with anything except for Defending Country. No sex involved there... and if it IS; than ALL sex there is wrong. Do they condone any frivilous sex on military bases? I really don't knnow how it works... from from stories that I have heard.. some pretty freaky **** goes on behind the walls..... but when it comes down to Battle; itreally doesn't matter who you prefer to have SEX with.
____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#2 Feb 28 2007 at 7:20 AM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
You have to wonder why Canada, Great Britain and all those other countries that allow people to be out in the military has had no problems with that policy change and the United States military still acts like open homosexuality would not work at all. It has nothing to do with the functioning of the military but more to do with appeasing the rightwing.

I had a friend that had a lesbian relationship while in the military. She was investigated and promptly discharged. Don't ask, don't tell isn't really a solution and given the numbers needed for our war on two fronts, I don't think we need to arbitrarily dismiss qualified people from the military.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#3 Feb 28 2007 at 7:41 AM Rating: Decent
Kelvyquayo wrote:
There are many many people against gays even being there..... but I seldom hear a real reason... other than "they shouldn't be there".


I have always held the opinion that a person's sexual preference has nothing to do with their ability to do whatever job they set their mind to. And the military should be no different. To be honest, I never really looked into why people were against having gay people in the military. I always assumed it was simply prejudice.

When I saw your post, I thought I'd do a little research on the 'net. And, like you, I can't find one thing explaining why people are so against homosexuals serving, aside from the "Unit cohesion" theory, but the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy is actually being proven to have the opposite effect.

The gay people who are currently flying under the government's radar and serving in Iraq are having difficulty forming any close friendships, because they can't tell others that they are gay, and they are afraid of what their reaction will be when they find out.

Until they find some genetic defect in a homosexual that causes them to be unable to fire a gun, I don't see the problem, myself.
#4 Feb 28 2007 at 7:45 AM Rating: Decent
****
5,870 posts
#5 Feb 28 2007 at 8:20 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,501 posts
The reason is for overall troop comfort and morale. Not many troops would feel comfortable wondering if the guy next to them is "checking them out". Considering that the overwhelming majority of soldiers and sailors are not homosexual, keeping them happy is more important than allowing those that could upset the apple cart in.

This is up there with women being on the front line, and why it's a bad idea too. It's for the overall mental state and morale of the troops. Not sure if I agree with homosexuals being in the military upseting things badly (they're already there anyway, and not causing much drama that I've seen, so what's the point?).
#6 Feb 28 2007 at 8:48 AM Rating: Decent
Metastophicleas wrote:
The reason is for overall troop comfort and morale. Not many troops would feel comfortable wondering if the guy next to them is "checking them out".


I don't buy that for a second. Maybe 10% of the armed forces are that homophobic. I would think that it would hurt morale to find out your good pal is gay, and didn't tell you. Makes you worry about what else people are lying about, and causes unrest.

Metastophicleas wrote:
This is up there with women being on the front line, and why it's a bad idea too.


While, in all honesty, I can understand this one a little more, because I could see men wanting to "protect" the little woman who thinks she can shoot a gun, I imagine that would go away pretty quickly once they see what she can actually do.
#7 Feb 28 2007 at 9:10 AM Rating: Decent
If I were bleeding on a battlefield I wouldn't be wondering if the Corpsman mending my wounds was a homosexual or not...



Jus' sayin'Smiley: dubious


Even being in the military, I don't see a problem with homosexual men and women being in the armed forces, there are some who already practice that lifestyle; they just do it without anyone knowing. The homosexual issue is not that big of deal with Sailors, Airmen, and Marines that I have personally talked to, I personally like to think its more of the media driving this homophobic ideology than actual military leadership. I think it is a matter of time before this issue will be resolved with allowing homosexuals to be in the military, the only real question and issue is how long?

Military policies have changed very rapidly in the last 20 years or so. 10 years ago Hazing and Sexual Discrimination had got to the point where parents of said military members started contacting both the Media and Congress. The Tailhook Scandal Changed U.S. Naval Policies on a very large scale, very rapidly.

Change is possible, and it will change when enough Americans become aware of the problem and when enough of them demand a change. That's about as simple as it gets.
#8 Feb 28 2007 at 9:17 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,501 posts
Belkira wrote:

I don't buy that for a second. Maybe 10% of the armed forces are that homophobic. I would think that it would hurt morale to find out your good pal is gay, and didn't tell you. Makes you worry about what else people are lying about, and causes unrest.

Metastophicleas wrote:
This is up there with women being on the front line, and why it's a bad idea too.


While, in all honesty, I can understand this one a little more, because I could see men wanting to "protect" the little woman who thinks she can shoot a gun, I imagine that would go away pretty quickly once they see what she can actually do.


No one asked you to "buy" it. Until you've been in the army (for example, taking from personal experience), and seen the fact that 90% are what psych majors would call Alpha Males, and see that they will attack anything that is weaker than them, you wouldn't understand.

There was some Harvard (only 85% certain it was Harvard) study a few years ago that asked men if they perceived homosexuality as a weakness, and 90% of the men surveyed said "yes" to that statement. Does that mean that homosexuality is a weakness? No. Perception is key here, and the Pentagon knows this. When you enlist in the army as part of an infantry division, you undergo some rather intense training, and you are injected with things that make you even more aggressive than normal. I personally watched guys fight over a washer/dryer. Just to wash clothes. Imagine if these same guys found out that one of their own was homosexual. They'd go off, and have done so.

I had to conduct the mental evaluation on a kid that was beaten for being homosexual, when I was handling in-processing at Ft. Benning. They beat the **** out of this kid. The recruits were disciplined and released from the army. The punishment should have gone further in my opinion, but the soldier that was beaten was still able to perform at his best within a few weeks of rest, and thus cadre felt that it was in the best interest of the army to just release these jackholes. It's also fact that events like this one don't happen often outside of IET/BCT.

It is also estimated that up to 8% of the current enlisted soldiers in the army are or have been homosexual (internal army research). Little is done in the regular army. No one really cares. It's only a problem when someone want's it to be a problem, usually someone who is homosexual, and trying to either be discharged, or is attempting to stir up trouble. I did personally know a guy who was in communications that was homosexual, and thought he was an o.k. guy. If you didn't actually know, you couldn't have guessed it about him.

As for women in combat...having seen the majority of them shut-down mentally, and ***** up, I'm going to veto your idea about it. I know there are women on the planet that can do it, and are just as good, if not better than many of the men, but I personally have yet to see an American woman that can hack it, and wants to. The wanting being the key on that one.
#10 Feb 28 2007 at 9:24 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Maybe 10% of the armed forces are that homophobic


You're only off by about 88%
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#11 Feb 28 2007 at 9:41 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,504 posts
I spent 10 years in the US Army and can see only 1 reason that would make openly gay soldiers unacceptable in the Army. On many of the Bases I served the billiting for the single soldiers were 2-3 man rooms. If one of those 3 were openly gay it would create a uncomfortable liveing enviroment for the other two. If you give Gay soldiers seprate houseing then you will either have straight soldiers claiming to be gay to get a room to their selvs or claims of segration.

Note I said openly gay above. I knew several "non open" gays of both genders in the service and had no issues with them, but as a whole there is a snence of homophobia in the service.
____________________________
"If you ask me, we could do with a little less motivation. The people who are causing all the trouble seem highly motivated to me. Serial killers, stock swindlers, drug dealers, Christian Republicans"

George Carlin.

#12 Feb 28 2007 at 9:48 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

I spent 10 years in the US Army and can see only 1 reason that would make openly Atheist soldiers unacceptable in the Army. On many of the Bases I served the billeting for the single soldiers were 2-3 man rooms. If one of those 3 were openly Atheist it would create a uncomfortable living environment for the other two. If you give Atheist soldiers separate housing then you will either have straight soldiers claiming to be gay to get a room to their selves or claims of segregation.

Note I said openly Atheist above. I knew several "non open" Atheists of both genders in the service and had no issues with them, but as a whole there is a feeling of religious bigotry in the service.


It's so true.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#13 Feb 28 2007 at 9:50 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,504 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

I spent 10 years in the US Army and can see only 1 reason that would make openly Atheist soldiers unacceptable in the Army. On many of the Bases I served the billeting for the single soldiers were 2-3 man rooms. If one of those 3 were openly Atheist it would create a uncomfortable living environment for the other two. If you give Atheist soldiers separate housing then you will either have straight soldiers claiming to be gay to get a room to their selves or claims of segregation.

Note I said openly Atheist above. I knew several "non open" Atheists of both genders in the service and had no issues with them, but as a whole there is a feeling of religious bigotry in the service.


It's so true.



I was openly a atheist throughout my service and never had a issue outside of an off color comment now and then.
____________________________
"If you ask me, we could do with a little less motivation. The people who are causing all the trouble seem highly motivated to me. Serial killers, stock swindlers, drug dealers, Christian Republicans"

George Carlin.

#14 Feb 28 2007 at 9:51 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

I was openly a atheist throughout my service and never had a issue outside of an off color comment now and then.


Well, they're more progressive in the Eagle Scouts these days, I hear.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#15 Feb 28 2007 at 9:55 AM Rating: Decent
I agree that I think gays should be allowed in the military. The sex thing is ridiculous, gays aren't sex crazed maniacs any more than straights are. Men and women working together could lead to sexual tension just as well as two gay men/women working together. People need to get over themselves. Just because someone is gay doesn't mean they are going to be sexually attracted to any tom, ****, sue, sally or harry that walks by.
#16 Feb 28 2007 at 10:00 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

The sex thing is ridiculous, gays aren't sex crazed maniacs any more than straights are.


This is what worries most straight men, I imagine.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#17 Feb 28 2007 at 10:03 AM Rating: Decent
It should be changed. It's the same arguments that people probably used for allowing blacks to serve. This is just stupid.
#18 Feb 28 2007 at 10:09 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

It should be changed. It's the same arguments that people probably used for allowing blacks to serve. This is just stupid.


It was changed. Is there really some sort of crushing social responsibility to allow gay service members to be openly gay? Why? There's a long list of things service people aren't aloud to speak openly about, why is this a big deal?

Don't get me wrong, I have little stake in this, but it seems the potential gain for gay people is a minute one at the almost sure cost of conflict and disruption in the military ranks. It's the cost/benefit calculation that bothers me. What's gained?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#19 Feb 28 2007 at 10:12 AM Rating: Decent
Why should the cost be in the equation of doing what is right? I know it's just ideals and to each their own, but why should we descriminate. Is there any non-biggoted reason for gays to not be allowed to be openly gay and in the military?
#20 Feb 28 2007 at 10:14 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Why should the cost be in the equation of doing what is right?


Because we don't live in Never Never Land.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#21 Feb 28 2007 at 10:15 AM Rating: Decent
Again, I'm sure the same argument was made for women, minorities being in the military. Things change. This should change.
#22 Feb 28 2007 at 10:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
I think we should populate our military entirely out of eunuch clones. Purple ones.

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#23 Feb 28 2007 at 10:19 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Again, I'm sure the same argument was made for women, minorities being in the military


Not really.

If it had been the case that blacks could serve with whites as long as they wore whiteface and women could serve with men as long as they had a strap on and bound their breasts, you'd have a case.

Oddly completely different things rarely end up using the same argument. For instance, the argument against elephants taking the place of tanks is completely different than the argument for camels taking the place of railroad cars.



Edited, Feb 28th 2007 1:19pm by Smasharoo
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#24 Feb 28 2007 at 10:25 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,504 posts
Nexa wrote:
I think we should populate our military entirely out of eunuch clones. Purple ones.

Nexa


So thats why they took a DNA sample from me........... And im neither a eunuch or purple........Smiley: jester
____________________________
"If you ask me, we could do with a little less motivation. The people who are causing all the trouble seem highly motivated to me. Serial killers, stock swindlers, drug dealers, Christian Republicans"

George Carlin.

#25 Feb 28 2007 at 10:46 AM Rating: Decent
Because homosexuality was so closeted in the past, the service member who was gay was open to blackmailing and manipulation, which could effect large or small scale operations.

The military carries the same issues with service members cheating and being subject to the blackmailing etc.

Now that being gay isn't such an issue, and outing doesn't carry the same fear to a lot of gays, then the military doesn't have much of a case to continue with refusing entry or dishonorable discharging.

Basically they are being forced slowly to give credible justification and are falling short.
#26 Feb 28 2007 at 10:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
For instance, the argument against elephants taking the place of tanks is completely different than the argument for camels taking the place of railroad cars.
Because it's a serious ***** to haul an elephant around by camel?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 120 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (120)