Why is it always assumed that homosexual and same-sex automatically equals gay men??
As a woman, I would have no issue showering in a "communal setting" with a lesbian. I'm not terrified of a woman looking at my body. Mostly because she's got her own, and she's seen it all before.
Keeping women out of the front line because men are stupid when women are around is idiotic. If a woman can do the job, then by god, there's no reason for her to be relegated to an office job or kept far behind the front line. It's insulting. Almost as insulting as a man who thrusts himself in danger to help her just because she's got tits.
Keeping gay men out of the army because some straight guy is going to be worried that his fellow soldier is looking at his wang is moronic. Keeping lesbians out of the army because they might, possibly, notice another woman's naked body is just as moronic.
It sounds to me like what's needed is better discipline and a breaking down of the social barriers that surround homosexuality.
ETA: Oh, and on the whole AIDS thing. Once again, people are using the term "homosexuals" to allude only to gay men. The risk of lesbians getting AIDS from intercourse with other women is so miniscule, it's not even funny. Heterosexual women are far more likely to get it from a heterosexual man.
And, as shocking as it may seem, heterosexuals engage in a lot of risky sexual behavior. Heterosexual couples even have **** sex. I know, this must come as a surprise to some of you, given some of the responses I'm reading.
Edited, Oct 13th 2009 9:27am by Belkira
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Obama's Rainbow Army
Obama's Rainbow ArmyFollow
publiusvarus wrote:
Again you're sacrificing the morale, which is huge in war, of the whole for the feelings of the very small minority. But we know liberal democrats hate the military and will do everything in their power to weaken it so this is not unexpected.
I don't know, Varrus. If all it takes to unsettle an American soldier is the thread of another guy checking him out, I'm not so sure I feel safe with them protecting my freedom. Sounds to me like the military is already pretty fucking weak if that's all it takes.
Quote:
And I for one don't think our govn should be condoning behaviour that leads to obvious health issues.
So, you're all for getting rid of tobacco subsidies then? Outlawing booze?
Technogeek wrote:
Quote:
And I for one don't think our govn should be condoning behaviour that leads to obvious health issues.
So, you're all for getting rid of tobacco subsidies then? Outlawing booze?
Well, outlawing booze would also reduce Varrus' chance of getting an STD to 0, so it's a win/win for him.
publiusvarus wrote:
Techno,
The US govn have sin taxes for tobacco and alcohol. So are you suggesting we start taxing homosexuals based on their sinful acts? I can go for that.
The US govn have sin taxes for tobacco and alcohol. So are you suggesting we start taxing homosexuals based on their sinful acts? I can go for that.
Would you like me to point out sarcasm for you?
You know, if you're struggling.
publiusvarus wrote:
Techno,
The US govn have sin taxes for tobacco and alcohol. So are you suggesting we start taxing homosexuals based on their sinful acts? I can go for that.
The US govn have sin taxes for tobacco and alcohol. So are you suggesting we start taxing homosexuals based on their sinful acts? I can go for that.
That's not what you said, ignorant one. By subsidizing the tobacco industry, the government is condoning that behavior. The obvious solution is to stop giving the tobacco industry our tax dollars.
Of course, this is really just about you being afraid (even terrified) of homosexuals.
Quote:
The simple fact is homosexuals engage in lifestyle choices that increase the liklihood that they're going to catch an std.
Guess what? You're wrong.
Quote:
Again you're sacrificing the morale, which is huge in war, of the whole for the feelings of the very small minority.
The gays are already in the military. They just can't say they're gay. If any wang-checking is going on, it's not going to increase because people are "out." And if gays in the military will make the entire military collapse (as you seem to believe), I dare say a strong breeze might knock out our soldiers. I think our soldiers are made of stronger stuff than that. Apparently you just don't trust the military. Why do you hate the military, Varus?
Our military collapsed, due to homosexuals.
We're now unguarded and waiting for France to invade.
We're now unguarded and waiting for France to invade.
publiusvarus wrote:
What it does is hurt the morale of the 99% of the military that isn't homosexual. Why would you want to hurt the morale of the military just to satisfy that 1%? The answer is obvious, you despise the military.
If that is enough to ruin morale, I say again, our military is pretty pathetic as it stands.
publiusvarus wrote:
What it does is hurt the morale of the 99% of the military that isn't homosexual.
Varus, if you were in the army and one of your barrack mates was gay, would you or would you not want to know?
Edited, Oct 13th 2009 5:09pm by Elinda
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
publiusvarus wrote:
Elinda,
You cite something showing that allowing gays in the military helps it.
You cite something showing that allowing gays in the military helps it.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
How exactly is this going to hurt the morale of 99% of the military?
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
publiusvarus wrote:
What it does is hurt the morale of the 99% of the military that isn't homosexual.
What a crock of sh*t. This is the same crap that crusty old generals are spouting in the UK since the ECoHR ruled it was illegal for the military to discriminate on sexual grounds.
This whole old boy, small minded attitude really @#%^s me off.
Surely it is more important that the man or woman is a good soldier/sailor or airman/airwoman? What they do in their private lives, as long as it is not illegal, has @#%^ all to do with anyone else.
Military morale is most affected by crap equipment, sh*t pay and being sent to remote parts of the world to cover up for a lying **** who was losing popularity.
Edited, Oct 13th 2009 3:15pm by Goggy
publiusvarus wrote:
Goggy,
Yeah those old generals who fought the ***** were real d*cks. What do they know about the military.
Quote:
What a crock of sh*t. This is the same crap that crusty old generals
Yeah those old generals who fought the ***** were real d*cks. What do they know about the military.
Even IF it were the same people now, I'll humour you for a minute, what the hell has fighting in WWII got to do with legislating a modern military?
wahwahvarus wrote:
Quote:
being sent to remote parts of the world to cover up for a lying **** who was losing popularity.
Thank you for once again illustrating just how much you loathe the military.
That's a distortion of the truth. I would like for all those boys and girls to come home safe. Just because I do not agree with the wars that we fight, doesn't mean I do not support out armed forces.
Trying to twist what people are saying varus is pretty low, and this is not the first time you've tried to accuse people of 'hating the military'.
Edited, Oct 13th 2009 3:22pm by Goggy
publiusvarus wrote:
Goggy,
But changing military tradition to suit your soicio-political agenda does.
Quote:
Just because I do not agree with the wars that we fight, doesn't mean I do not support out armed forces.
But changing military tradition to suit your soicio-political agenda does.
The military have a lot of 'traditions', some of them have no place in a modern armed force.
It used to be that amputation was the most common medical practice for those who were injured during wars.
Damn modern medicine! It is changing our traditions!
Damn modern medicine! It is changing our traditions!
Recent Visitors: 682
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (682)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Obama's Rainbow Army
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC