Space aliens might land tomorrow and blow up the world, making this whole argument moot. However, like your objection, it's not likely enough to be cause for real concern.
I never said that we're suffering from a troop shortage. I'm just asking why we shouldn't retain competent soldiers willing to serve just because they're gay? The fact that it could "rock the boat" isn't enough of a justification.
I don't need anything else. The fact that repealing DADT could cause increased unit friction in the middle of two wars is enough to oppose it.
I read a source today stating 1/4 military personnel knows a homosexual that they serve with. I cant find it, however.
[pointless personal experience]And while I was in another platoon had a flaming homo in it and he seemed to do great.[/pointless personal experience]
That's why I think it should be up to the commander's discretion. What works for one unit may not work for another.
I hesistate to comment on this. I was denied service in the Army due to my hearing, therefore I think my perspective on this is limited. Frankly I'd like to know one thing: is it going to adversely affect the morale of a large number of our military personnel? If the answer is yes, I'd be hesitant to force it on them. The purpose of the military is to fight wars effectively, not to be fair to everyone or be a platform for social experimentation.
OTOH, since homosexuality is not a crime in the USA, it does seem inconsistent to treat it as one within the military.
My chief concern is whether it will affect military readiness through adverse effects on morale. If an honest study says the answer is No, then it would be more consistent with domestic law to remove the restrictions.
Segregate the homophobes into homophobe platoons then, they're the minority here thats the issue, not the homosexuals in this case, since you put it that way.
I hesistate to comment on this. I was denied service in the Army due to my hearing, therefore I think my perspective on this is limited. Frankly I'd like to know one thing: is it going to adversely affect the morale of a large number of our military personnel? If the answer is yes, I'd be hesitant to force it on them. The purpose of the military is to fight wars effectively, not to be fair to everyone or be a platform for social experimentation.
OTOH, since homosexuality is not a crime in the USA, it does seem inconsistent to treat it as one within the military.
My chief concern is whether it will affect military readiness through adverse effects on morale. If an honest study says the answer is No, then it would be more consistent with domestic law to remove the restrictions.
It depends on the unit.
There is a grand total of zero evidence it would negatively effect military readiness.
A unit full of phobes is about as likely as a unit full of homos.
I dont see what the big deal is they're already serving incognito and 1/4 of soldiers are aware of homosexuals and seem fine with it.
I dont see how sexuality is more disruptive than say, skin color or social class. especially when there shouldn't be any sex to be had in the army lol.
I am sure that the type of reaction that gays serving openly would get would depend alot on the type of unit that they were in. In softskill units that already have lots of women in them I doubt it would be to much of a problem. In infantry units where it is all males and most of them younger, I can see lots more problems. I dont care what some Admirals or Generals say, they are not down at the troop level and havent been in many years, they dont know how it will effect troops at the squad and platoon level or how those troops feel. I also see big problems in the Special Ops world. I was in the infantry 5 years ago and I am still in the Army and feel that I know better than a General about how the troops at that level feel which is where this decision will have the most impact. I am not saying that DADT is not worth changing just something to think about.
Yes, because being gay means you are some sort of subhuman animal who cannot control their sex drive :roll:
Well, you know the military doesn't have communal heterosexual showers for just the reason about men not being able to control themselves. Do you think it would be any difference with gays being in the general population now and not having to worry about hiding their desires?
Well no, you have a very very low opinion of our service people if you think they would commit murder over something that is none of their business and does not effect them.
No it's not that I have a low opinion, it's that I have attended enough NJP's/court martial to know and not assume. Have your served?Well no, you have a very very low opinion of our service people if you think they would commit murder over something that is none of their business and does not effect them.
BTw, let me assure you that the military is not free of crime, especially robbery, murder, rape etc., During Vietnam there were many incidents of Fragging but ruled as FF's. I am not saying this is the rule it's far from it, as a whole the military is a well run organization run by dedicated men and women. Non the less being gay will create a rift amongst the enlisted ranks.Well no, you have a very very low opinion of our service people if you think they would commit murder over something that is none of their business and does not effect them.
No it's not that I have a low opinion, it's that I have attended enough NJP's/court martial to know and not assume. Have your served?
Your right we will see, I as well served in the 70's/80's and you saw what I saw. Perhaps shave changed but knowing enlisted, I don't think so.I served in the 70's.
There will be a 1 year study by the military then the congress will have hearings. We may see a decision on this in 2 years maybe.
Well I can see it now at the Marine Corps Ball, males bring their male dates and women bringing their women dates, yep this will go over like a wet rock. I really don't care what sexual preference people have non of my business really but, when something like this can effect the cohesiveness of a fighting unit, we will have problems.I served in the 70's.
There will be a 1 year study by the military then the congress will have hearings. We may see a decision on this in 2 years maybe.
Your right we will see, I as well served in the 70's/80's and you saw what I saw. Perhaps shave changed but knowing enlisted, I don't think so.
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?