- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
I know...I never get invited to the orgies...
How the hell did this grow 200+ pages since I last looked at it about 5-6 hours ago.
I refuse to read that many posts.
So what has been going on?
I demand a recap!
:mrgreen:
Simply existing, no. But even the most innocent action, or comment can be perceived as sexual harassment, in the miltiary. In the military, you can be charged with sexual harassment for looking at someone the wrong way; literally. You have to understand that we're dealing with a system where pointing your finger isn't allowed, because it can be taken as a threat of violence.
So, if gays and straights are forced to share billets, expect a rise in sexual harassment cases.
What are you right about?I'm right and everyone else is wrong. That purdy much sums it up.
Really? Now you are suggesting that our soldiers get their feelings hurt when someone gay points a finger at them?
Forget DADT. We might as well surrender to the Salvation Army. :lol:
What are you right about?
No, just telling you how the system works.
It's apparantly some sort of gay sex act. I haven't exactly lead a prudish existance, but even I hadn't heard of it until he mentioned it on this forum.
Except, it would damn hard to inact a DADT policy with a black soldier. Obviously that's a dumbassed example. However, DADT could be left in place--with modifications. Are you aware of the race riots that the military experienced for the 20 +/- years after desegregation?
If we could avoid that kind of blowback, shouldn't we do it? I would like to avoid it. Wouldn't you?
"Believe" is the key word. You can "believe" pretty much anything, but here is a hint for you: most gays did not, nor do they, take part in wild orgies. It's something that you may dream about, but it is not reality. Most gays are surprisingly straitlaced.
With all due respect you live in a fantasy world Redress...Gays are the most promiscuous people in t he world....Not all but most have multiple sex partners......Go to google and type in gay bath houses in San Francisco in the eighties and you will find the info.......
With all due respect you live in a fantasy world Redress...Gays are the most promiscuous people in t he world....Not all but most have multiple sex partners......Go to google and type in gay bath houses in San Francisco in the eighties and you will find the info.......
With all due respect you live in a fantasy world Redress...Gays are the most promiscuous people in t he world....Not all but most have multiple sex partners......Go to google and type in gay bath houses in San Francisco in the eighties and you will find the info.......
You can document this, or is it just another wild claim with no basis in reality?
It was harder for blacks to hide, but that doesn't change the dynamics much. Soldiers still had to interact with someone many did not want to. And it being harder, potentially even dangerous, was not reason to not allow them to serve with those they served with. And the army adjusted despite any trouble or problems. And it was right regardless of the cost. The same is true here.
That said, I suspect we would have less trouble than you might think. The objection to homosexuals is much less than the objection to segregation was back then.
IMO, Navy is exactly right, liberals live in a fantasy world where they are never wrong, there are no consequences for failure, and everyone is equal in all aspects including outcome. If you and others are wrong regarding your assessment then what are the consequences to the military? This law has been on the books for 17 years so tell us the consequences of that law in regards to national security. We know the results with the law but not without it. There are proponents on each side so tell me what is the worst case scenerio if the law is repealed and then ask yourself if it is worth it?
You're absolutely right. But, here--in my opinion--we have a way to make this a safer transition. Why not give it a shot, vice repeating history? I think our military and it's members are worth the effort. Don't you?
With all due respect you live in a fantasy world Redress...Gays are the most promiscuous people in t he world....Not all but most have multiple sex partners......Go to google and type in gay bath houses in San Francisco in the eighties and you will find the info.......
Most of the people in the Navy have had many sexual partners, NP. I'd say that was also true for the other branches as well.
Most of the people in the Navy have had many sexual partners, NP. I'd say that was also true for the other branches as well.
Considering that Navy Pride is on record here on this site bragging about committing adultry with a married woman while her husband was off serving our country, it is kind of ironic listening to him lecture others about being promiscuous.
IMO, Navy is exactly right, liberals live in a fantasy world where they are never wrong, there are no consequences for failure, and everyone is equal in all aspects including outcome. If you and others are wrong regarding your assessment then what are the consequences to the military? This law has been on the books for 17 years so tell us the consequences of that law in regards to national security. We know the results with the law but not without it. There are proponents on each side so tell me what is the worst case scenerio if the law is repealed and then ask yourself if it is worth it?
The Good Reverend lost count of all the fillies he had in his stable during that time....impdaddy:
You're absolutely right. But, here--in my opinion--we have a way to make this a safer transition. Why not give it a shot, vice repeating history? I think our military and it's members are worth the effort. Don't you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?