Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
Reply To Thread

Obama's Rainbow ArmyFollow

#1 Oct 11 2009 at 12:38 AM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
So not only is Barry Obama a peacemongering wastrel, he's also an ghey-lover!

Quote:
Obama to end military gay policy

US President Barack Obama has said he will end the ban on gay people serving openly in the military.

He said he would repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that allows gay people to serve in the military if they do not reveal their sexual orientation.

Mr Obama was speaking to America's largest gay group - the Human Rights Campaign - in Washington.

He had been criticised by some in the gay community for the lack of action on gay marriage and the military issue.

A big gay rights protest march is planned in Washington for Sunday.


Mr Obama was addressing thousands of gay and lesbian people at a fundraising dinner in the US capital.

On the military issue he said the US could not afford to lose those people who had much needed skills for fighting.

"We should not be punishing patriotic Americans who have stepped forward to serve the country," Mr Obama said.

"We should be celebrating their willingness to step forward and show such courage."

Mr Obama did not give a timetable for repeal of the policy, passed by Congress in 1993, under which thousands of service members have been discharged.

The US president has repeatedly pledged to tackle issues important to the gay community.

But he has faced criticism for what many in the gay community see as lack of action on his promises.

Mr Obama asked the audience to trust his administration.

"I appreciate that many of you don't believe progress has come fast enough. Do not doubt the direction we are heading and the destination we will reach," he said.

One issue causing disquiet among the US gay community is the issue of gay marriage, the BBC's Rajesh Mirchandani in Los Angeles says.

Mr Obama has been criticised for not delivering on his promise to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which limits how local and federal bodies can recognise gay partnerships and determine benefits.

In his speech, Mr Obama did call on Congress to repeal the act and he also called for a law that would extend benefits to domestic partners.


About bloody time.

____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#2 Oct 11 2009 at 12:58 AM Rating: Excellent
If anyone responds with some kind of idiotic "if we let people be openly gay in the military, the terrorists will have won" response, I'd like to point out, before they've even opened their fat yaps, that the terrorists have a lot less tolerance for gays than we do, and if you're so opposed to the idea, maybe you should join up with the terrorists.
#3 Oct 11 2009 at 6:02 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
sheep, now that's a different story.

Edited, Oct 11th 2009 9:02am by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#4 Oct 11 2009 at 6:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Do other nations (say Canada, the UK, France, Spain, etc) have prohibitions against open homosexuals serving in the armed forces? I honestly have no idea. Nobby's post would make me assume not but I don't know how recently it might have changed or if there never were or what.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#5 Oct 11 2009 at 6:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Canada allows homosexuals in the military. A quick google, shows an article stating that it was allowed in 1996 after the Supreme Court of Canada rule it was discrimination to not recruit or promote homosexuals. Open season since then.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#6 Oct 11 2009 at 7:05 AM Rating: Good
*****
12,049 posts
Maybe I'm missing something, but... why is this news? He's been saying he's going to do it since the campaign trail. Unless I miss my guess, he said he was going to do it since being president as well (or at least his administration has said it), but it's always "Well, we have a lot of other things to do first."

I don't know, I'm just a little bitter. This seems like an easy enough matter that keeps getting pushed aside. There's still no time-table for it, so I'm not sure why this is news?
#7 Oct 11 2009 at 7:07 AM Rating: Excellent
**
559 posts
Since the issue is mostly about lesbians, I'll assume the reason the Republicans are opposed is because of some deep-seated, self-loathing, closeted homosexual identity.

On a more serious note, who was the last US President that was as active and engaged in domestic and foreign issues as Obama has been? If you step back and look at it, he has not even been in office for a year and we have already started in-depth discussions about healthcare, something critics said he could not accomplish even in his first full 4 year term.

Maybe our standards were so low with Bush and we are so happy he's gone that Obama gets more credit than he deserves sometimes, but I think "you're doing a heckuva job, brownie." >.>
#8 Oct 11 2009 at 7:55 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,909 posts
I always thought the existing situation was pretty retarded anyway. It straddles the line between acceptance and discrimination without really being one or the other. "You can be gay in the army, just...just don't tell anyone, okay?"

I mean, what did that ever really achieve except a whole lot of bullsh*t and really stupid discharges of otherwise decent soldiers? The gay soldiers don't win because they're not allowed to be gay, and the homophobes don't win because there are still gay people in the army. They're just being needlessly sneaky about it.

Anyway. Good move by Obama if he can follow it through.

Locke wrote:
I don't know, I'm just a little bitter. This seems like an easy enough matter that keeps getting pushed aside. There's still no time-table for it, so I'm not sure why this is news?


Well, lots of gay rights activists - and some people on this board, too - had expressed concern that Obama was ignoring or sidelining gay rights issues in the interest of political expediency. I guess him openly announcing his intentions at a fundraising dinner can be seen as a move to allay those concerns.

Edited, Oct 11th 2009 3:58pm by zepoodle
#9 Oct 11 2009 at 9:13 AM Rating: Excellent
****
5,684 posts
Damnit, there goes my ace-in-the-hole draft dodging technique.
#10 Oct 11 2009 at 10:30 AM Rating: Decent
*****
16,160 posts
Time for communal showers ala Starship Troopers! That's the only way to keep it even between the **** gazers checking out other dudes' packages and letting the straights have a leeringly good time too by scoping the chick's bearded clams and boobs.

Fair is fair!

Totem
#11 Oct 11 2009 at 10:31 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something, but... why is this news? He's been saying he's going to do it since the campaign trail. Unless I miss my guess, he said he was going to do it since being president as well (or at least his administration has said it), but it's always "Well, we have a lot of other things to do first."

I don't know, I'm just a little bitter. This seems like an easy enough matter that keeps getting pushed aside. There's still no time-table for it, so I'm not sure why this is news?

There are a lot of critics out there who spout off on the notion that Obama hasn't done anything he promised to do during his campaign.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#12 Oct 11 2009 at 11:36 AM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Untilrecently, homosexuality was verboten in UK Armed Forces (imprisonment + dishonourable discharge).

In all honesty, I don't know whether it's formally allowed or that the rule is no longer enforced. I suspect the former.
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#13 Oct 11 2009 at 11:41 AM Rating: Excellent
@#%^
*****
15,953 posts
This'll be okay as long as they aren't sent to places that are dirty. You know, like Afghanistan and Iraq.
____________________________
"I have lost my way
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"

#14 Oct 11 2009 at 11:45 AM Rating: Good
It's been allowed for some time now in the UK (a decade, give or take a year or two), partially thanks to the European Court of Human Rights.
#15 Oct 11 2009 at 2:31 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Beware the Rainbow Army.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#16 Oct 12 2009 at 3:41 AM Rating: Default
*****
16,160 posts
So why are you bitter, Locke? Are you burning with desire to serve your military in flamboyantly fab rainbow and sequin festooned digis? It's not like you can't join now unless you have some weird compulsive need to blurt out to total strangers that you love the cack. Just keep it to yourself, dude.

Totem
#17 Oct 12 2009 at 4:13 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
Watching Generation Kill put a very interesting spin on all this for me. On the front line, there's just not any privacy for days and days on end. Days of sh*tting out in the open in front of one another, quick-changing combat type uniforms, treating various fungus-rotting parts of the body in front of each other because you get wet and oiled and can't wash for days on end, ************ with other people around, to relieve the tension, or the berserker highs.

Despite me being all about the orgies, I can see why most soldiers would want their units to be made up of people who are of "incompatible" sexuality to themselves. I know some professions attract a higher population of people of particular orientations, and I don't know what the armed forces are like in that way. But given the statistics in the general civilian population, it might be feasible and preferable to put the gay men in with units of straight women, and the lesbians in with units of straight men.

The Bi-sexuals would just have to be thrown together, and their officers and their own professionalism keep them funtioning in and out of combat in their own way.

I know that one reason that some national armies have kept women out of front-line combat positions is that in practise in other armies of mixed sexes, there has been a "tactical problem" in male soldiers habitually exposing themselves to danger (against combat procedures) to rescue injured and stranded female soldiers, even when no romantic relationship was present.

Edited, Oct 12th 2009 8:32am by Aripyanfar
#18 Oct 12 2009 at 4:18 AM Rating: Good
*****
12,049 posts
Totem wrote:
So why are you bitter, Locke? Are you burning with desire to serve your military in flamboyantly fab rainbow and sequin festooned digis? It's not like you can't join now unless you have some weird compulsive need to blurt out to total strangers that you love the cack. Just keep it to yourself, dude.

Totem


I'm bitter because all of my serving relatives are social conservatives who decry gays serving as the end of America's military prowess. I want them to squirm.

Ok, that's not really it; more like it seems a relatively easy solution that was promised a while ago and then just pushed to the side. If Obama has too much on his plate, this isn't even a spoonful of a problem; I want him to take a bite, make some of his base happy, and show a positive move toward equal rights.

And I want to see my relatives squirm.
#19 Oct 12 2009 at 4:25 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,909 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
But given the statistics in the general civilian population, it might be feasible and preferable to put the gay men in with units of straight women, and the lesbians in with units of straight men.


Damn it Ari, all that's going to do is start a rape scene.
#20REDACTED, Posted: Oct 12 2009 at 5:26 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) That's funny.
#21 Oct 12 2009 at 5:36 AM Rating: Good
****
5,684 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Quote:
Canada allows homosexuals in the military.


That's funny.


pubes contributed more than I initially assumed he would.
#22 Oct 12 2009 at 5:37 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Quote:
Canada allows homosexuals in the military.


That's funny.

I know, right?! Which made Bush pleading for our assistance even more laughable.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#23 Oct 12 2009 at 6:36 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
publiusvarus wrote:
Quote:
Canada allows homosexuals in the military.


That's funny.

I know, right?! Which made Bush pleading for our assistance even more laughable.

Well, he had to have some allies that would come in and make the second Iraq war look legitimate, since the UN wouldn't sanction it. That's what Australia was there for too, despite all the petitions and demonstrations before we went it.

Our force was very small, in comparison to the US. Only a few thousand. But at least all our privates and grunts went in learning Arabic via their military training.
#24REDACTED, Posted: Oct 12 2009 at 7:26 AM, Rating: Unrated, (Expand Post) Aripya,
#25 Oct 12 2009 at 7:27 AM Rating: Good
*****
10,359 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Aripya,

Quote:
Well, he had to have some allies that would come in and make the second Iraq war look legitimate, since the UN wouldn't sanction it. That's what Australia was there for too, despite all the petitions and demonstrations before we went it.


Not to worry we now have a liberal p*ssy running the country who won't take step one without every other countries approval.



I can't really imagine the worldview someone has to have in order to think that this is a bad thing.
#26 Oct 12 2009 at 7:52 AM Rating: Decent
LockeColeMA wrote:
Totem wrote:
So why are you bitter, Locke? Are you burning with desire to serve your military in flamboyantly fab rainbow and sequin festooned digis? It's not like you can't join now unless you have some weird compulsive need to blurt out to total strangers that you love the cack. Just keep it to yourself, dude.

Totem


I'm bitter because all of my serving relatives are social conservatives who decry gays serving as the end of America's military prowess. I want them to squirm.

Ok, that's not really it; more like it seems a relatively easy solution that was promised a while ago and then just pushed to the side. If Obama has too much on his plate, this isn't even a spoonful of a problem; I want him to take a bite, make some of his base happy, and show a positive move toward equal rights.

And I want to see my relatives squirm.


If I had to guess, we won't see ANY controversial issues formally attacked by Obama until the health care thing goes, one way or the other. He absolutely does not want any more distractions from that goal. In the mean time, he probably just feels the need to reinforce the good standing he built with all those as-of-yet unfulfilled campaign promises.
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 722 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (722)