Prop 8 OverturnedFollow

Even more to the point, if no one is allowed to show any sexuality or have any sort of relationship beyond the most sterile (as Alma wants us to believe), then there's absolutely no reason to ban homosexuals from serving anyway whether we know they're homosexual or not.

Yeah, now they have to lie to stay in the military. Because when people ask about their lives back home, they have to invent relationships with people of the opposite sex.



So no one asks him about his girlfriend back home? Why don't I believe that...?



No, other people can talk about their significant others. Keep pictures of them around. Receive gifts from them. Talk to them on the phone. Things like that.



Considering you are the only military member on this board who is trying to make us believe that, I find it difficult to just accept your word for it.



Except, you know, that sham marriages are illegal. Good try, though!



No, I wasn't. I was making a point. I'm not surprised you didn't get it, though.



So, from everything you're saying, it sounds like repealing DADT wont' make a bit of difference. So you must be for it, then, I assume. Because absolutely nothing will change. Well, that's nice to see. I was beginning to think that maybe you just hated homosexuals because they disgust you or something.

In an effort to move this along to at least 40 pages, I'd like to say I essentially trust Mike Mullen and Colin Powell.

Why was Bush holding that dude's hand anyway? I mean.. I get shaking hands (or OMG!!! bowing) as a greeting, but seriously, when did hand holding become an acceptable gesture of diplomacy? Hand-in-hand is supposed to be a metaphor.

I'm assuming you meant skirt?

Learn to read Elnese. I always mess up the spelling of skirt and shirt since in Elnese they are pronounce the same. Plus he could have just as well been found out of uniform wearing women slacks, or jeans instead of the denim bell bottoms he should have been wearing.

As 2 the last 2 sentances, 1)the pronouns refer to the subject in sentence before it and 2) Gender =/= sexuality preference.

This is a common misunderstanding, as most people think one's gender and sex is the referring to the same thing. Your gender is either male, female or hermaphrodite and determine by both your brain and what sexual organ you are born with, ********** ovaries, one of each (hermaphrodites), ovotestes, or other gonadal dysgenesis. Trans sexual persons brain tells them they are one gender, while the social system in which they are raise in says they are the gender of their physical sexual organs.


Sexuality has to do with the sex of persons you are attracted to, Heterosexual, homosexual or bi-sexual.

If you are still confuse or I just added to your confusion instead of clearing things up, there are a few Allafems who can translate elnese.

I didn't say that you couldn't talk about their relationship, I said freely. There's a huge difference. That difference being it depends on your relationship. If Ana May is a NCO or in my COC, then I can't talk about it because that violates the military's image. On the other hand, if Ana May is a civilian, then I have more room to talk. You realize how many people that are married but separated who have to keep all of their relations undercover?



False, that's the whole point of DADT. You're not lying to stay in, because no one is asking. Everyone knows that the butch female and flaming guy are gay, as long as you're not making videos or showing affection in public. I know you're thinking "hey that's not fair, they should be able to show affection in public". In all of the types of relations that can get you trouble, I assure you, a homosexual one is at the bottom of the list. Besides, as I will state below, showing affection in public gives the perception and the military operates off of perception, hence the focus on image.

Once again, this is all about images, not homosexuality. If the CO attempts to chapter a serviceman because of their sexuality, that will draw negative attention to the CO, unit and the overall service. So chances are very high that nothing will be done unless its something outrageous, such as making films and selling them or something. Those types of charges are usually the ones that they add onto something major, such as rape. If a person rapes another and they can throw in the sodomy charge, they will, just to make it worse for the person.

Matter of fact, during another OPD, the BDE legal stated just that. He said that he wouldn't even do the case because of the BDE CDR's image. Even though the legal was married, it seemed that he had a little sugar in his tank, so we can tell he was a little biased.



Different people ask different questions. People may ask if they are married or single, but they aren't asking them about their sexual desires, i.e. sexual positions, what type of people they are interested in, etc. If they do ask, you have a right not to answer. If you're gay and they ask "You have a girl back home", you can reply with "no".

You're just making stuff up to make a point..



Read two responses up. No, everyone can't do that. It all depends on who their significant other is. I knew a SSG at work who was told to remove the picture of his wife and her friends off of his desktop because it was a picture of them in a club. She was fully dressed, but because they were "Club girls", someone got offended..

Once again, you're making stuff up to make a point.



Really? Who else is military on this forum. Find me a military person who disagrees with that statement. I dare you, because you can't do it, if that person is telling the truth. There are so many "unwritten" rules that some seem legit. Just mention Mandatory fun, Dinning In's, Dinning outs, Hails and farewells, FRG's, etc. Just because you think that stuff doesn't exist, doesn't mean they don't exist. It probably has to do with the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about. Just a hunch.



We went over this already. Love is not the determining factor of a "Sham marriage". Even your own sources supported that. It is simply meeting the criteria of a relationship. Getting married to a complete stranger that you don't love is not a "sham marriage". Doing so and not meeting the relationship's criteria is. Good try, though!! Actually it really wasn't good at all, since we already went over this.



Silly you... The actions will not change, but the IMAGE will. That's the whole point I'm trying to tell you. You can't have rules against other activities such as sodomy, but then support people being openly gay. That's hypocritical. Yes, sexuality and sexual activities are two different things, but so is two gay people behaving as platonic friends vs two gay people showing affection to each other. If you're showing affection, then there is perception and that's what the military goes by regardless if it is true or not. This goes back to the rules I mentioned earlier.








Edited, Sep 15th 2010 11:44pm by Almalieque

It's funny, because the sheik looks pregnant.

It's because it's not about being gay or not... I keep telling you all, it's about the image that the military perceives to be the best suited for the military, this includes various sexual and non-sexual activities, life styles, etc. So, yes, it's more hypocritical because everyone else is restricted to this same image and allowing homosexuals to be open in a relationship that the military has clearly deemed to be against that image but prevent everyone else to do the same is very hypocritical.

It's very simple, it's all or nothing, at least in reference to sexuality.



I know, we already stated this. This is why DADT works. You being gay doesn't mean you have to show affection at work to your significant other. This allows you to join and do your job without your sexuality preventing you from accomplishing the mission.

Edited, Sep 16th 2010 12:44am by Almalieque

The military has an image on accepted behavior in regards to relationships and sexuality, many of which are accepted by society, but not accepted by the military, i.e. a married person who is going through a divorce and separated from their spouse but is dating someone else.

Everyone has to abide by these rules.

The military has rules against sodomy.

Heterosexual couples have to keep any practiced activities that are considered sodomy to themselves.

Currently, homosexuals can serve in the military.

The military runs off of image and perception, so even if johnny and susie are platonic friends, if it appears to be more and their relationship isn't accepted, then actions will take place.

If homosexuals are allowed to openly serve in the military, i.e. showing affection, that gives off the perception of a relationship more than platonic, i.e. intimate, which violates the sodomy rules.

These are the same rules that everyone else has to keep to themselves. Johhny and Susie can't be real good friends because of perception, yet, it's ok for Adam and Steve to prance around giving the perception that they are intimate.

That is hypocritical.

Either change all the rules on relationships for everyone or don't change anything. I'm sure there are probably some rules that can be changed that would end up being contradictory, but open homosexuality is definitely not one of them.

I'm sorry Belkira, which unit do you serve with? I think I missed it.

Ask GAXE and Doug if they've served with people that everyone knew were gay. Ask them if they were kicked out. Honestly, you are purely making stuff up. YOu have never served in the military and you probably have never even been on on a military base. I've seen countless homosexuals prancing around with their significant others all the time, so I apologize for thinking you're full of it, because you are.

To be honest, I only brought that topic to reach 40 pages, but it astounds me on how someone can be so ignorant. I can understand other topics where we're just having opinions, but you have absolutely ZERO military experience and you have the audacity to make up BS and claim it's true just because it makes you feel better. You are a better person than I am, because I would never go out and purposely make a fool of myself on a subject that I know I have no idea what I'm talking about. I mean, you and I both know that you have know personal experience at all dealing with this or any references or anything. You're just making stuff up that sounds right based on the "rule".

You have to be completely delusional if you think somebody can avoid orders to Iraq or Afghanistan because s/he came out of the closet (i.e getting kicked out).. get real....

If I didn't think you would just find some random people to lie, I would bet you money via Western Union that any servicemen that you find that's been in the military for at least a couple of years would agree with me. The military is about perception period.

That's reality, deal with it

if we all stop now, there will be no 40get.

Edited, Sep 15th 2010 9:25pm by Bardalicious