Pentagon happy for uphill gardeners dress up in khaki and go kill brown people in foreign lands.
Carry on.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- I demand a 50 page thread!
I demand a 50 page thread!Follow
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
What's there to discuss? No substantive argument for Don't Ask; Don't Tell can be articulated. At this point, most people either think it's stupid and tire of the rhetoric, or they are stupid and spout the rhetoric.
I'll celebrate when it's repealed, but not prematurely.
I'll celebrate when it's repealed, but not prematurely.
Kachi wrote:
most people either think it's stupid and tire of the rhetoric, or they are stupid and spout the rhetoric.
Ok. 60 pages.
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.
Gah. Can I just do a week of detention?
We've got Alma up to 4 pages in the OOT if you want to come over. Not sure how desperate you are...
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
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
In before Alma starts arguing nonsense.
It should be repealed immediately and replaced with what worked for generations: NO FUDGE PACKERS IN FOXHOLES!!!!
MoebiusLord wrote:
It should be repealed immediately and replaced with what worked for generations: NO FUDGE PACKERS IN FOXHOLES!!!!
Not your best work by far. I expect more from you, Moe.
3/10.
Bardalicious wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
It should be repealed immediately and replaced with what worked for generations: NO FUDGE PACKERS IN FOXHOLES!!!!
Not your best work by far. I expect more from you, Moe.3/10.
Keep gay ***** out of our holes?
Bardalicious wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
It should be repealed immediately and replaced with what worked for generations: NO FUDGE PACKERS IN FOXHOLES!!!!
Not your best work by far. I expect more from you, Moe.
3/10.
CNN Headline News reports that in the wake of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal Astroglide will now be part of the standard kit for soldiers in the field?
What I got from that story is that at least 58% of Marines are pussy homophobes.
MoebiusLord wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
It should be repealed immediately and replaced with what worked for generations: NO FUDGE PACKERS IN FOXHOLES!!!!
Not your best work by far. I expect more from you, Moe.
3/10.
CNN Headline News reports that in the wake of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal Astroglide will now be part of the standard kit for soldiers in the field?
In the wake of the DADT repeal, the defense department would like to remind those currently serving that a "Navy Seal" is not adequate protection against STDs contracted through **** intercourse.
I gotta think they would change the name of the BUDS program, though.
What are the chances of this going through prior to January?
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
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
Uglysasquatch wrote:
What are the chances of this going through prior to January?
From 3 seconds of reading a short Opinion article: Not good.
MoebiusLord wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
It should be repealed immediately and replaced with what worked for generations: NO FUDGE PACKERS IN FOXHOLES!!!!
Not your best work by far. I expect more from you, Moe.
3/10.
CNN Headline News reports that in the wake of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal Astroglide will now be part of the standard kit for soldiers in the field?
Bardalicious wrote:
You should have gone for a Gun Oil reference
Damnit. That would have been a good one. See what a broad swath of culture I miss out on because I put mine in places that get wet naturally?
MoebiusLord wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
You should have gone for a Gun Oil reference
Damnit. That would have been a good one. See what a broad swath of culture I miss out on because I put mine in places that get wet naturally?
Bardalicious wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
You should have gone for a Gun Oil reference
Damnit. That would have been a good one. See what a broad swath of culture I miss out on because I put mine in places that get wet naturally?
Divorce is the biggest benefit of marriage. I can trade her in for 3 1/3 her age.
MoebiusLord wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
You should have gone for a Gun Oil reference
Damnit. That would have been a good one. See what a broad swath of culture I miss out on because I put mine in places that get wet naturally?
Divorce is the biggest benefit of marriage. I can trade her in for 3 1/3 her age.
It seems to be the older you get the more expensive they are.
MoebiusLord wrote:
It should be repealed immediately and replaced with what worked for generations: NO FUDGE PACKERS IN FOXHOLES!!!!
So are you against gay soldiers or gay furries?
Just as Planned.
paulsol wrote:
I demand a 50 page thread!
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
I'm just always amused with the "creative" ways DADT is described in the press today:
Er? DADT didn't ban openly gay service. It disallowed military officers and/or recruiters to *ask* if a soldier or potential soldier was gay. Being gay was a disqualifying condition in the military prior to DADT and it was not changed by DADT. All DADT did was allow gay soldiers to not have to lie about their homosexuality on official forms, nor subject them to potential questioning of their sexual orientation, thus meaning they weren't risking more serious offenses if they were caught.
At the time, DADT was praised by gay rights activists. Maybe this is a bit of a nit pick, but could we at least get the history of this law right, especially given that it happened just in the last 20 years? This is hardly the first time I've seen DADT so completely inaccurately described in the media. It makes it seem like DADT was some evil law passed by anti-gay bigots to try to keep them down, when in reality it was passed by gay rights activists as step in a progression towards eliminating the prohibition against gays serving in the military.
That's great and all, but do you have to lie about the process? It just kinda seems weak.
Quote:
Obama has called it a top priority to repeal the 1993 law that bans openly gay service.
Er? DADT didn't ban openly gay service. It disallowed military officers and/or recruiters to *ask* if a soldier or potential soldier was gay. Being gay was a disqualifying condition in the military prior to DADT and it was not changed by DADT. All DADT did was allow gay soldiers to not have to lie about their homosexuality on official forms, nor subject them to potential questioning of their sexual orientation, thus meaning they weren't risking more serious offenses if they were caught.
At the time, DADT was praised by gay rights activists. Maybe this is a bit of a nit pick, but could we at least get the history of this law right, especially given that it happened just in the last 20 years? This is hardly the first time I've seen DADT so completely inaccurately described in the media. It makes it seem like DADT was some evil law passed by anti-gay bigots to try to keep them down, when in reality it was passed by gay rights activists as step in a progression towards eliminating the prohibition against gays serving in the military.
That's great and all, but do you have to lie about the process? It just kinda seems weak.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
Er? DADT didn't ban openly gay service. It disallowed military officers and/or recruiters to *ask* if a soldier or potential soldier was gay.
Quick quiz: What's the second two letters stand for?
The law casually referred to as DADT wrote:
(b) POLICY- A member of the armed forces shall be separated from the armed forces under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense if one or more of the following findings is made and approved in accordance with procedures set forth in such regulations:
[...]
`(2) That the member has stated that he or she is a homosexual or bisexual, or words to that effect, unless there is a further finding, made and approved in accordance with procedures set forth in the regulations, that the member has demonstrated that he or she is not a person who engages in, attempts to engage in, has a propensity to engage in, or intends to engage in homosexual acts.
[...]
`(2) That the member has stated that he or she is a homosexual or bisexual, or words to that effect, unless there is a further finding, made and approved in accordance with procedures set forth in the regulations, that the member has demonstrated that he or she is not a person who engages in, attempts to engage in, has a propensity to engage in, or intends to engage in homosexual acts.
Which isn't to say that there were not previous bans on open homosexuality but DADT definitely "bans openly gay service" and that's the current code our armed forces policy is based off of.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#25gbaji,
Posted: Dec 01 2010 at 3:47 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Don't Tell. Which they were not allowed to do before the law was passed. The reality is that despite the compromise-sounding name, there was no trade off here. If a member of the military was found to be homosexual regardless of how, they would be discharged. Thus, a member of the military could not "tell" anyone they were gay before DADT was passed. What DADT did was prevent the military from asking them if they were gay. This was kinda important since depending on the branch they were serving in, and what specialties they entered into, and what security clearances they held, the average gay solder may very well have lied on an official form a half dozen or more times, meaning potentially very serious federal prison time if they were ever discovered.
gbaji wrote:
Don't Tell. Which they were not allowed to do before the law was passed. The reality is that despite the compromise-sounding name, there was no trade off here. If a member of the military was found to be homosexual regardless of how, they would be discharged. Thus, a member of the military could not "tell" anyone they were gay before DADT was passed. What DADT did was prevent the military from asking them if they were gay. This was kinda important since depending on the branch they were serving in, and what specialties they entered into, and what security clearances they held, the average gay solder may very well have lied on an official form a half dozen or more times, meaning potentially very serious federal prison time if they were ever discovered.
That's what DADT did. Let's stop pretending that it in any way made serving in the military as a gay person more difficult.
That's what DADT did. Let's stop pretending that it in any way made serving in the military as a gay person more difficult.
Recent Visitors: 216
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (216)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- I demand a 50 page thread!
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC