- Joined
- Feb 12, 2006
- Messages
- 24,373
- Reaction score
- 14,951
- Location
- Wisconsin
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
I wonder how many of our troops are offended when they hear that some people think they are not mature enough to serve alongside gays.
They might be offened, if someone was actually saying that. But...
How 'bout you ask the 67% of Marines and 58% of Army soldiers, serving in combat arms units about it?
You've got to be kidding me! You realize that homosexual people, whether male or female, aren't all violent rapists... right? I'm actually doubting you do. We have female soldiers in the military, what if they get raped by a male soldier? Whatcha gonna say then, huh?
Furthermore, they're already in the military, they just don't say they're homosexual. Even if we granted your premise that most homosexuals are violent rapists, wouldn't it be better to know who is and who isn't a homosexual? Aren't you at greater risk when it could be anyone in your squad? One second you're dropping the soap, the next your best mate is up in your junk.
Ahh, there's nothing more entertaining than observing the beliefs of people like you
Or the 90 + % of those same people who have actually served with gays who think it would not be a problem.
This is why I don't put stock in polls. You can always fiddle with the numbers to prove your point. BTW, "90+%", is a new number. Where did that come from?
Translation: Pretend you are straight.
Because people are free to run their mouths.
Yes, the DoD investigation. Combat troops where against it, but if you narrow it to just those who have served with gays, the number changes dramatically.
Depends kinda. We would never have considered either a PDA when I was in the navy, unless in uniform, and even then not really. The Marines(I think) have actual regulations on PDAs, but the rest of the service does not, so it probably varies from branch, base and command.
LGBT people aren't the bad guys at all. They made the mistake of gambling on Obama caring about their issues. They were unwise.
It's Obama's fault it didn't pass in the Senate?
Seriously; I think it is Obama's fault. I believe that he could have issued an executive order, or two and pulled the teeth out of DADT. DADT would have still been in place, but it would have been practically inert.
But, that's not what the Lefties want to go down. They want a show.
Seriously; I think it is Obama's fault. I believe that he could have issued an executive order, or two and pulled the teeth out of DADT. DADT would have still been in place, but it would have been practically inert.
But, that's not what the Lefties want to go down. They want a show.
I have never once "froliced", "flaunted", "girl talked", or "decored".
You have a rather stereotypical view of gay people.
It's not the finger we're concerned about. Sorry, sorry, couldn't resist.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 percentage of the ranks does that group make up?
Now you're playing some serious numbers games.
Each command usually has local policies concerning PDA and it does vary, however the one constant, is that PDA is strictly forbidden, while in uniform, whether on post, or off, whether on duty, or off.
Seriously; I think it is Obama's fault. I believe that he could have issued an executive order, or two and pulled the teeth out of DADT. DADT would have still been in place, but it would have been practically inert.
But, that's not what the Lefties want to go down. They want a show.
my point is that if you allow all gays to openly talk and declare their gayness, that will include my "stereotypical".
and they will push the envelope as sure as we are having this conversation.
and my further point, again is that gays ARE allowed in the military now, as long as they conduct themselves in a way that doesnt include this sterotypical I describe.
The very meaning of military, as anyone who has been thru the rigors of preparing for combat knows, does not allow this mindset.
Its a macho environment, this is not a glee club.
conduct yourself accordingly or you will be harassed.
I dont care if you repeal till the cows come home, that really changes nothing.
And will only add additional resentment if straight soldiers are somehow called aside and punished for telling an openly gay soldier to act like a soldier.
quit being ridiculous.
You are gay and want to serve in the military, come on in, but realize this is no place for you to soapbox your PC insecurities.
deal with it
It has to do with living in close proximity to those of the same sex who may find you sexually desirable. That would be something I wouldn't want to even know about.Why should we ban LGBT soldiers from serving openly because it may offend someone, why are you singling out LGBT soldiers?
It has to do with living in close proximity to those of the same sex who may find you sexually desirable. That would be something I wouldn't want to even know about.
Actaully, the translation is, "act like a soldier and leave your private life private".
You can't say every gay soldier would see it that way, though. Gay or not, guys are, well, guys.In the words of a gay guy I knew once "I am not interested in strait guys, they would never be able to satisfy me".
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?