Gays In The Military

[anns82]

Unlikely because her sexuality still didn’t need to be brought up. Speaking about her sexuality and cooperating with the police are mutually independent.

I could see it being brought up the commanding officer were to ask what connection she has to the investigation. The police officer could have responded they know she is likely to know the person’s whereabouts because they have a certificate stating they are married. The military is very much in interested in their soldiers interactions with law enforcement, so wanting to know the evidence for their reason to connect the two is not that surprising. Again, that is not necessarily the case - more information will be available in the ACLU case than the news article.

The most pertinent question was whether or not this woman deserves her job back, and not how can we make sure we don’t find out someone is gay. If she does deserve her job, then you must abolish gays being disallowed from that army; if not, then you must accept institutionalized sexism in military The latter is unacceptable, which is why DADT is most likely being repealed, it’s just a matter of when.

Considering DADT was created in an era where people would only be privy to that form of information based on PDA or chatting about things that they should not be discussing with coworkers, and she did play by those rules, I do not see a problem with her getting her job back. She lost her job based on a rule originally acting on a person’s actions rather than paperwork. Unlike race or gender, the only way you actually know someone is gay is based on actions (prior to “gay marriage”). I can see changing DADT to specify it to being about actions rather than personal history (in which state licenses can be included). As it generally stands with DADT - a person’s sexuality is the military’s business if the person makes it their business. I can see changing the third party issue, but the sentiment should be retained.

 

[lynx]

I could see it being brought up the commanding officer were to ask what connection she has to the investigation.

Her answer is probably that they live together. At that point, DADT should have been ringing in that officer’s mind, letting them know to stop prying into that section of her life.

The police officer could have responded they know she is likely to know the person’s whereabouts because they have a certificate stating they are married.

Right, and what did the officer expect as a response? How was this information to the CO going to help his case?

The military is very much in interested in their soldiers interactions with law enforcement, so wanting to know the evidence for their reason to connect the two is not that surprising.

Simple answer, they were living together. Outing her to her CO isn’t going to help the officer, and if they thought that it would I feel very sorry for that official.

Again, that is not necessarily the case - more information will be available in the ACLU case than the news article.

We’ll see; I look forward to being wrong.

Considering DADT was created in an era where people would only be privy to that form of information based on PDA or chatting about things that they should not be discussing with coworkers, and she did play by those rules, I do not see a problem with her getting her job back. She lost her job based on a rule originally acting on a person’s actions rather than paperwork. Unlike race or gender, the only way you actually know someone is gay is based on actions (prior to “gay marriage”). I can see changing DADT to specify it to being about actions rather than personal history (in which state licenses can be included). As it generally stands with DADT - a person’s sexuality is the military’s business if the person makes it their business. I can see changing the third party issue, but the sentiment should be retained.

Ok, she deserves her job back, we’re making steps in the right direction. Now, why should she not be able to express her sexuality as much as a straight soldier? How’s this, if you talk about your sexuality in the presence of the military you are dismissed from service. That sounds fair no?

 

[anns82]

Her answer is probably that they live together. At that point, DADT should have been ringing in that officer’s mind, letting them know to stop prying into that section of her life.

Right, and what did the officer expect as a response? How was this information to the CO going to help his case?

Simple answer, they were living together. Outing her to her CO isn’t going to help the officer, and if they thought that it would I feel very sorry for that official.

That is assuming the DADT policy was forefront in the police officer’s mind. If they contacted CO in order to have the person’s participation in the investigation not conflict with the person’s work, a legal document presented to legitimate a participation request would not be uncalled for. Again, this may be the case, it may not be. There are plenty of possibilities which we do not know simply through the article.

Ok, she deserves her job back, we’re making steps in the right direction. Now, why should she not be able to express her sexuality as much as a straight soldier? How’s this, if you talk about your sexuality in the presence of the military you are dismissed from service. That sounds fair no?

Considering sexual comments are often understood as sexual harassment, and the fact that the military has both male and female members, yes, I agree that sexuality should not be discussed in the military. I know this does not seem practical, but if a woman in the military were to feel offended by a male counterpart talking about his sexuality, she complains to a CO and the person is likely to be reprimanded. Not as extreme as you are suggesting should be done, but the man and woman are not forced through their employment to shower and sleep in the same facilities. Thus, the male/female harassment does not pose the same problems as same gender harassment. There is still a natural barrier that can very practically be addressed through different living quarters. This can not be done for people with same sex attraction. Luckily, it is not an issue if the people are not aware of the attraction. Pretending it is simply about “being fair” is not reality. Life is not fair. Get over it.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I think your use of the word agenda is misplaced. For one to have an agenda one must have a plan, steps forward towards a goal. In my case, my goal is to let you know that I believe homosexuality is predominantly the work of chemical physiology. However, it would be careless to state that nurturing does not play a role. The extent of roles as to each reason though, is highly debated with just cause. But go on…

I wasn’t saying you have an agenda, per se. I was simply drawing a distinction. I have a tendency to do that.

Thinking from a Nietzsche-n perspective, if one can recognize their wants and desires, and recognize that which keeps those desires from them (as you have), then you should be able to make strides towards your desires (finding women attractive). Are you in counseling or anything? It would be interesting to know what if any resolution you are seeking and what your results are.

Well, I am making baby steps towards that goal. There is a problem, though. I like the comparison of the human brain to a computer. I’m sure you know the most basic rule of programming: garbage in, garbage out. When a technological computer is programmed with bad code, it’s simply a matter of going through the code and correcting the typos (or bad programming, as the case may be). When a biological computer is programmed with bad code, it’s not quite so simple. Human programming is kinda like Borg technology in that it’s regenerative. You can take out the bad programming but it will eventually come back. From what I understand, it takes repetition in order to overcome the faulty programming. It would have been better and easier for me is those faulty lines of code weren’t installed in the first place and, in my opinion, God could have taken steps to prevent it (i.e., bringing a strong man into my life in early childhood to make up for my father’s deficiencies) but apparently didn’t care to do so. My prayers for healing go ignored, so I sometimes wonder if God is having a funny at my expense. As His property, I suppose He has the right to do that, but it would then bring into question just how just that would be…to make a person’s life into a joke by making them suffer isolation, loneliness and self-loathing for no good reason.

Yes, I’m in counseling. The HMO I’m in tends to favor CBT methods, but at the same time, I think it’s important for me to really dig in to how these messages got installed into my own personal biological computer. Maybe it’s not, but that’s how I see it.

 

[lynx]

That is assuming the DADT policy was forefront in the police officer’s mind. If they contacted CO in order to have the person’s participation in the investigation not conflict with the person’s work, a legal document presented to legitimate a participation request would not be uncalled for. Again, this may be the case, it may not be. There are plenty of possibilities which we do not know simply through the article.

There is no possibility where informing a CO that one of their recruits are gay is going to help your case. Even if the officer had said nothing, the likelihood of the CO pulling a marriage certificate is unlikely, if not negligent, due to DADT. DADT limits your ability to ever find out or question the sexuality of someone in the military. If the CO requested a copy of the marriage certificate then they are violating DADT. You’re completely outta luck on that route unless you throw something even remotely plausible. Otherwise, we’ll just have to wait until there’s more story to tell.

Considering sexual comments are often understood as sexual harassment, and the fact that the military has both male and female members, yes, I agree that sexuality should not be discussed in the military. I know this does not seem practical, but if a woman in the military were to feel offended by a male counterpart talking about his sexuality, she complains to a CO and the person is likely to be reprimanded. Not as extreme as you are suggesting should be done

Why not? Equal rules for all parties, sounds fair to me.

, but the man and woman are not forced through their employment to shower and sleep in the same facilities. Thus, the male/female harassment does not pose the same problems as same gender harassment.

True it’s not the same problem, but I guess if that is a problem then use an existing military solution, partition members by their sexuality. Give gays their own sleeping quarters, lets just keep segregating people because it seems to be the right thing to do

There is still a natural barrier that can very practically be addressed through different living quarters. This can not be done for people with same sex attraction. Luckily, it is not an issue if the people are not aware of the attraction. Pretending it is simply about “being fair” is not reality. Life is not fair. Get over it.

LOL Segregation and discrimination are a fact of life so accept it? I guess I could have made the same argument a couple centuries ago about slavery and arrived at the same conclusion today

 

[anns82]

LOL Segregation and discrimination are a fact of life so accept it? I guess I could have made the same argument a couple centuries ago about slavery and arrived at the same conclusion today

“LOL” - comparing DADT to slavery

Racism is not the same thing as issues around Sexual attraction.

The military has to work in the real world. It deals with the reality of life and death in which applying the standards of our cushy society does not apply. Let them do their job. If they find that the job were to be done better with allowing people to wear their sexuality on their sleeve, then they would have done that. The people who generally want to completely get rid of DADT are the ones who are not in the military, and who do not have to deal with it’s ramifications. Again, life is not fair. They need to figure out how same sex unions affect DADT. Otherwise, don’t bring your sexuality up and it wont be an issue.

 

[Zatzat]

True it’s not the same problem, but I guess if that is a problem then use an existing military solution, partition members by their sexuality. Give gays their own sleeping quarters, lets just keep segregating people because it seems to be the right thing to do

From a previous poster on this thread, who was a former tank commander, he stated that unit cohesion is paramount and that with no questions asked, an unwanted person can be kicked out of their position within the tank…meaning a homosexual wouldn’t be accepted amongst heterosexuals.

In the U.S.A. it seems as though the problem could easily be solved if you had homosexual tank teams and heterosexual tank teams.

Well segregated by sexual orientation. You could even have annual competitions, the gay tanks against the straight tanks.

Or everyone could just work together regardless of who they’re legally have sex with.

 

[lynx]

“LOL” - comparing DADT to slavery

Lets be fair, I compared your argument to slavery. Beware, my use of context is brilliantly subtle LOL

Racism is not the same thing as issues around Sexual attraction.

Well done. Racism and homosexual discrimination issues are distinct, but at the same time have one commonality, that is that the person being discriminated against is being discriminated for something out of their control.

The military has to work in the real world. It deals with the reality of life and death in which applying the standards of our cushy society does not apply. Let them do their job. If they find that the job were to be done better with allowing people to wear their sexuality on their sleeve, then they would have done that.

LOL I just made this argument a little while back, proposing military officials who speak about their sexuality be dismissed from the military.

The people who generally want to completely get rid of DADT are the ones who are not in the military, and who do not have to deal with it’s ramifications.

This is how I see it, either everyone is affected DADT straights and gays alike, or no one is. I don’t like discrimination in the USA, where our basic principals are freedom and equality. Without those we might as well be China.

Again, life is not fair. They need to figure out how same sex unions affect DADT.

So if you’re gay, does society have a moral right to make life difficult and discriminate against you? I’m pretty sure you are making a double standard but please correct me if i’m wrong.

Otherwise, don’t bring your sexuality up and it wont be an issue.

LOL I already said this, now twice

In the U.S.A. it seems as though the problem could easily be solved if you had homosexual tank teams and heterosexual tank teams.

Well segregated by sexual orientation. You could even have annual competitions, the gay tanks against the straight tanks.

Or everyone could just work together regardless of who they’re legally have sex with.

Why stop with sexuality? I think if you segregate based on religion next then you can get way more teams for your tank games

 

[anns82]

Well done. Racism and homosexual discrimination issues are distinct, but at the same time have one commonality, that is that the person being discriminated against is being discriminated for something out of their control.

A person can control talking about their sexual practices. A person can not control their skin color.

So if you’re gay, does society have a moral right to make life difficult and discriminate against you? I’m pretty sure you are making a double standard but please correct me if i’m wrong.

Telling people not to talk about their bedroom in public is not making life difficult or discriminating. If it is really that torturous to not talk about something then I would wonder about that person ability to keep a secret, which is pretty important when in the military.

For as “brilliant” as you claim yourself to be, you do not seem to comprehend how changing one little law would be a massive effect on the whole military system, when if you simply don’t talk about it, it’s not an issue.
Find a way to make DADT work with states laws on gay unions and leave it at that.

 

[Shin]

There’re some good sermons on what being a man is all about here and also here, one entitled 'Husband’, referring to some key books worth checking out too.

Very helpful in these times for clearing up what might be obscurred because of the incessant work against masculinity today. I’m sure a lot of people who do not think they need these kinds of refreshers need them. And in the process the sermons and writings show why it is so necessary that men be men.

There’s some of the Father in all men.

 

[AliciaCL]

I wasn’t saying you have an agenda, per se. I was simply drawing a distinction. I have a tendency to do that.

Well, I am making baby steps towards that goal. There is a problem, though. I like the comparison of the human brain to a computer. I’m sure you know the most basic rule of programming: garbage in, garbage out. When a technological computer is programmed with bad code, it’s simply a matter of going through the code and correcting the typos (or bad programming, as the case may be). When a biological computer is programmed with bad code, it’s not quite so simple. Human programming is kinda like Borg technology in that it’s regenerative. You can take out the bad programming but it will eventually come back. From what I understand, it takes repetition in order to overcome the faulty programming. It would have been better and easier for me is those faulty lines of code weren’t installed in the first place and, in my opinion, God could have taken steps to prevent it (i.e., bringing a strong man into my life in early childhood to make up for my father’s deficiencies) but apparently didn’t care to do so. My prayers for healing go ignored, so I sometimes wonder if God is having a funny at my expense. As His property, I suppose He has the right to do that, but it would then bring into question just how just that would be…to make a person’s life into a joke by making them suffer isolation, loneliness and self-loathing for no good reason.

Yes, I’m in counseling. The HMO I’m in tends to favor CBT methods, but at the same time, I think it’s important for me to really dig in to how these messages got installed into my own personal biological computer. Maybe it’s not, but that’s how I see it.

LCMS, your suffering is never useless. Track down John Paul II’s apostolic letter on ‘redemptive suffering’ entitled **Salvifici Dolores **(Pope’s apparently always issue their letters in Italian). It is profound – highly praised even by Protestant theologians. It is very lengthy and deep, pretty heavy on the theology for the masses. It has helped many to understand and ‘use’ their suffering for good ends. Also there is a convert form the active homosexual lifestyle who has appeared on the Catholic Channel (EWTN) program The Journey Home. I do not recall his name but he sought the help of the Catholic ministry, known as **“Courage,” **which is solely for those who seek spiritual help with coping with homosexuality. Journey Home has its own web page and you can listen to past programs online for free (no visual). You can also email them with questions. That might help direct you to the individual whose testimony is right on point for you. They might even put you in touch with that individual. I recall that he was quite involved with the Courage program. He may have also written on the subject. You are clearly on the right path. Indeed with continued work, over time, I think you might come to see that God is using you and your suffering to benefit many, many others. Rather than your cynical joke now that God may be having a funny with you, He is more likely preparing you, like He has so often throughout history chosen his helpers, who initially are blind to their mission. My prayers are with you.

 

[Lypher]

Well the vote went ahead of the desired date of Secretary Gates. I actually drafted a long post, but deleted it.

As I mentioned before…

“Aye aye, Sir”
(I understand and will carry out the order)

 

[elts1956]

While it’s debated by people who have an agenda (pro-gay: born that way and anti-gay: chose the lifestyle), I think the real life histories of people are far more indicative. In my case, the only inborn factor that predisposed me to the possibility of same-sex attractions was my sensitive temperament. I tend to take things personally. Now, after I was born, I have few memories of affection or attention from my father. Where those memories should be can be found memories of continual criticism or a sense of being tired of me. Granted, there are a few good memories (3 come to mind), but most are bad (a plethora pop into my head simultaneously) and some of the bad cancel the good out. As to my mom, she was very critical of boys in the neighborhood, which fostered a fear and mistrust of other boys, closing off my belief in my ability to make friends. After all, how can one develop a friendship with someone one fears and/or mistrusts? My friends were teachers and other campus staff at school. Oh, and both my parents demonstrated obvious preference for my little brother. Hmm…no encouragement to be masculine from dad…mom sending messages that boys are bad…low priority in the family…no peer friends. Add to that the shame of being a boy developing to a man after getting the message that boys are bad and boys who grow up and have beards and such aren’t so good. Pray tell…where was I supposed to get my sense of masculinity from? A rock? Heck, how can I even desire something (masculine identity) when I’ve received the message that it’s a bad thing?

So, tell me. I wasn’t born “gay,” and I certainly didn’t choose to be same-sex attracted. I think it’s 10% nature (my sensitive temperament) and 90% nurture (mom/dad/no friends) and zero choice. My choice would be to wake up tomorrow morning with no more same-sex attractions and to be attracted normally to women.

You fall directly into the only category a priest described when talking about homosexuality. He said gays and lesbians result from the lack of having a father-son, father-daughter relationship. The father is the most important supportive figure a child can have. He says gays and lesbians do not exist, only people who are shattered emotionally because of lack of trust. I don’t have the priest’s name at the tip of my fingers, but I can find it if you are interested. He is a priest of the Eastern Catholic rite.

 

[Zatzat]

You fall directly into the only category a priest described when talking about homosexuality. He said gays and lesbians result from the lack of having a father-son, father-daughter relationship. The father is the most important supportive figure a child can have. He says gays and lesbians do not exist, only people who are shattered emotionally because of lack of trust. I don’t have the priest’s name at the tip of my fingers, but I can find it if you are interested. He is a priest of the Eastern Catholic rite.

I grew up with two guys, identical twins. Both had the same father.

One is gay, the other heterosexual.

Your priests opinion is nothing but massive fail.

 

[portarica]

Sexual active homosexuals are commiting immoral acts. It is the ACT that is evil not the individual who is celebate. The same rules apply to heterosexuals who engage in sex with others than a marriage partner. Homosexuality is outside the Christian “norm” and laws of the Catholic Church.

Actually according to Aquinas and Augustine, if you engage in sex with your spouse and it goes beyond what is required for procreation it is also immoral. So don’t go pleasing or get pleased by your spouse.

Peace

 

[anns82]

Actually according to Aquinas and Augustine, if you engage in sex with your spouse and it goes beyond what is required for procreation it is also immoral. So don’t go pleasing or get pleased by your spouse.

Peace

I hope you don’t believe that is actually what the Church teaches. Please look into JPII’s Theology of the Body to get a more accurate understanding on what the Church teaches on the purpose and meaning of sex. If you like audio :

catholicaudio.blogspot.com/search/label/Theology%20of%20the%20Body

could be a good starting place.

 

[ethereality]

Homosexuality is a developmental disorder, one that affects how people think and react. I have never seen someone struggling with homosexual desires – especially to the point where they would self-identify with the media’s depiction of a homosexual – be a balanced individual. That is, they have serious problems. For this reason, if it were up to me, as the poll asked, I would bar those self-identifying as homosexual from serving in the military: They need therapy, not to be given a weapon and placed in high-stress situations.

Sorry for the awkward sentence structure, but I’m writing hurriedly; I have much work to do.

 

[portarica]

I hope you don’t believe that is actually what the Church teaches. Please look into JPII’s Theology of the Body to get a more accurate understanding on what the Church teaches on the purpose and meaning of sex. If you like audio :

catholicaudio.blogspot.com/search/label/Theology%20of%20the%20Body

could be a good starting place.

Until a few decades ago, that was the church’s teaching on sex.

And the church still hangs on to some vestiges of that message as it can’t seem to let go of the need for sex to be procreative in nature to be of value.

And while the church tries to go with an expanded version of what is good for married catholics, it can’t get its hands around the rest of the population that may be disordered by no fault or desire of their own.

Peace

 

[portarica]

Homosexuality is a developmental disorder, one that affects how people think and react. I have never seen someone struggling with homosexual desires – especially to the point where they would self-identify with the media’s depiction of a homosexual – be a balanced individual. That is, they have serious problems. For this reason, if it were up to me, as the poll asked, I would bar those self-identifying as homosexual from serving in the military: They need therapy, not to be given a weapon and placed in high-stress situations.

Sorry for the awkward sentence structure, but I’m writing hurriedly; I have much work to do.

How about the way the military has relaxed its intelligence and criminal background standards to get more volunteers qualified, is that OK with you?

Peace

 

[portarica]

You fall directly into the only category a priest described when talking about homosexuality. He said gays and lesbians result from the lack of having a father-son, father-daughter relationship. The father is the most important supportive figure a child can have. He says gays and lesbians do not exist, only people who are shattered emotionally because of lack of trust. I don’t have the priest’s name at the tip of my fingers, but I can find it if you are interested. He is a priest of the Eastern Catholic rite.

What about all those gay Irish priests who had loving fathers and mothers who proudly encouraged them to join the priesthood, were they shattered?

Peace