Gays in the military

[Polaris]

Then usual baseless accusations againt the US are noted. But dont worry-when you run out of places to hide the US will be there, as always, to bail you out.

The United States Military is the best in the World becuase it worries about being effective rather than being a job fair for every so called opressed group who wants the military to conform to their idea of what it should be.It is telling that the nicest thing you can say about the Royal Navy is that it has become a haven for homosexauls. ill bet that makes people feel secure. I guess Churchhill was right when he commented that the most sacred tradiotions of the Royal Navy were " Rum, buggery, and the Lash"

Abu Grahib is a baseless accusations. Did it not occur in your magically mystical world of the purity and and moral superiority of heterosexuals?  Well at least you note it and can pretend it did not exsist. :confused:

Worries about being effective but at what cost?

Yes you do have a stong military. You spend how much of your budget on the military? Finding better ways to kill people. This is something to be proud of?

GB does not need your help and niether do we, Canada, though if you could remove Harper through your usual military action of pot dictators that would be nice.

Also lets see what did the Vatican think about the US’s action in Iraq. hmmmm I dont remember them being exactly for it, but maybe Im wrong

Also if the Royal Navy men are so useless, why was your country worried that they we were going to pull out. Oh thats right you have spread yourself so thin with your “we know the truth and we must spread freedom mantra” (through military actions and occupations) that you need their help.

 

[He_Man]

Abu Grahib is a baseless accusations. Did it not occur in your magically mystical world of the purity and and moral superiority of heterosexuals? Well at least you note it and can pretend it did not exsist.

He isn’t denying Abu Grahib, but merely stating that our militaries in scope and size are very different. What does that have to do with whether or not active homosexuals are a good thing for the US military? Would rampant homsexuality have prevented Abu Grahib? If not, this is an irrelevant point to bring up. And until you reinforce your glass house, you probably should read this kind of stuff:

google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=british+soldiers+convicted&spell=1

Worries about being effective but at what cost?

Yes you do have a stong military. You spend how much of your budget on the military? Finding better ways to kill people. This is something to be proud of? .

You almost had a point until you said this. If you honestly think that’s why the military exists, solely to kill people, you really aren’t qualified to discuss on this topic any more. Concepts like peacekeeping, antional defense, and humanitarian relief are myths apparently. And it is easy for Canada to run their mouth when they know the most powerful military ever is their next door neighbor. Must be nice to use none of your own money and know you essentially have a proxy military to defend you.

GB does not need your help and niether do we, Canada, though if you could remove Harper through your usual military action of pot dictators that would be nice.

Also lets see what did the Vatican think about the US’s action in Iraq. hmmmm I dont remember them being exactly for it, but maybe Im wrong

Also if the Royal Navy men are so useless, why was your country worried that they we were going to pull out. Oh thats right you have spread yourself so thin with your “we know the truth and we must spread freedom mantra” (through military actions and occupations) that you need their help.

The Vatican told Bush to think long and hard before acting and that he had serious reservations. Wow, big shocker. I prefer the wars where the Pope enthusiastically endorses the guaranteed loss of life and destruction of society, and where you see the bumper stickers with the Holy See giving a thumbs up for war

Oh wait, that never happens.

And you conveniently didn’t mention the Vaticans’s feelings on us finishing what needs to be done in Iraq and not pulling out. Right decision or not, unless you can undo the past, complaining about the invasion of Iraq is like chastizing the Germans for invading Poland. There really isn’t much they can do now, is there?

No one ever said the Royal Navy was “useless.” In fact, the premise of the thread was one of attacking the US military for a policy that has been very effective. Then comparisons were made to “if the Brits can do it, why can’t you?” That’s where the comparison began, and it was a silly one. Don’t be defensive about Canada or Britain’s military; they has a proud history too, and do a lot of great things. But don’t expect the world’s most effetive military to change policies based on paradigms that simply don’t even come close to lining up.

 

[vern_humphrey]

A major problem is activism. Soldiers, airmen and sailors should be soldiers, airmen and sailors, not activists.

We had a dose of activism not long ago – unqualified people were being graduated from things like flight school because of their sex (an admiral who objected was disciplined.) A female navy fighter pilot crashed a plane and an Army female helicopter pilot announced it couldn’t be pilot error.

When training standards and basic safety investigations are compromised for political reasons, it costs lives.

All kinds of people are welcome in the military – if they come to serve as soldiers, airmen and sailors, and not to promote a social agenda.

 

[pathia]

All kinds of people are welcome in the military – if they come to serve as soldiers, airmen and sailors, and not to promote a social agenda.

So you’re saying all gays are activists? I don’t know any gays that are, just the fancy talking heads that show up on TV. The rest I know are perfectly normal, including the gay active duty soldiers I know through my fiance.

 

[vern_humphrey]

So you’re saying all gays are activists? I don’t know any gays that are, just the fancy talking heads that show up on TV. The rest I know are perfectly normal, including the gay active duty soldiers I know through my fiance.

Please don’t put words in my mouth.

I am saying that activism – gay, feminist, White Power, etc. – is not compatible with military service. And at the current time, many gays are activists.

 

[pathia]

Please don’t put words in my mouth.

I am saying that activism – gay, feminist, White Power, etc. – is not compatible with military service. And at the current time, many gays are activists.

Sorry, but the way it is worded seems to indicate that all gay soldiers are activists first, and soldiers second. I don’t know any examples of this. The only soldiers I know who are activists waited until after their service was over before they spoke out.

All branches of the military have codes of conduct. They all include codes against lying and dishonesty. DADT fails a simple logic test. If a soldier IS asked by a superior officer, and it does happen despite the don’t ask part, he or she is, under current policy, allowed to lie. This violates all their conduct books. It simply isn’t logical, I think DADT is more damaging than having an outright ban, because it can force soldiers to lie. If they’re forced to lie about one thing, then they may be more likely to lie about other things, or give fellow soldiers a reason in their head to lie about other matters, since it’s okay for gays to lie.

Playing the race card annoys me, but I can’t help but play it here. Every single argument about morale, unit efficiency and nervousness of personnel was said about integrating african americans into the forces. It’s like you can cut and paste, or use ‘find and replace’ in Word with these documents about the matter.

 

[estesbob]

Playing the race card annoys me, but I can’t help but play it here. Every single argument about morale, unit efficiency and nervousness of personnel was said about integrating african americans into the forces. It’s like you can cut and paste, or use ‘find and replace’ in Word with these documents about the matter.

There is no comparison between a race of people who were brought to this country in chains, bought and sold at will, whipped, raped and disciminated against to this day ONLY because of the color of their skin AND a group of people who’s only distinguishing characterisitc is the manner in and with who they have sex. i hate to play the race card but to assert so is racist in itslef.

 

[estesbob]

Please don’t put words in my mouth.

I am saying that activism – gay, feminist, White Power, etc. – is not compatible with military service. And at the current time, many gays are activists.

Agreed-the military is not a jobs program nor is it a place for social experimentation.

 

[whatevergirl]

Look, I did go to college and showered in the same shower area on the male dorms. I never hit upon any other guy and wouldn’t do it if I were in the military. I had a sense that there were also guys with SSA there but it didn’t bother me. Why does it bother anyone else? It denotes an underlying insecurity on the part of some.

No, it denotes that people think that if someone is homosexual, he/she is going to chase after any and every person of the same sex. That is not so. Are all men attracted to me, just because I’m a woman? NOOOOO. Was I attracted to every man I met because I’m a woman? NOOOOO. So, not sure why there is this ‘fear’ that a man, if he takes a shower next to another man who is homosexual, he is going to get hit on?

 

[whatevergirl]

I will say though, the ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ rule should be in place, for the safety of homosexual men. I could see some men, in the military, harming someone who is homosexual, for a variety of reasons…more so than I could see a homosexual man making sexual advances to men who are straight. Sad to say that, but I can see the need for that policy. So, that being said…I don’t see anything wrong with gay men serving in the military. If they are willing to lay their lives on the line, and make it through the tough requirements it takes to be a soldier, why shouldn’t they be allowed to serve?

 

[estesbob]

No, it denotes that people think that if someone is homosexual, he/she is going to chase after any and every person of the same sex. That is not so. Are all men attracted to me, just because I’m a woman? NOOOOO. Was I attracted to every man I met because I’m a woman? NOOOOO. So, not sure why there is this ‘fear’ that a man, if he takes a shower next to another man who is homosexual, he is going to get hit on?

Would you be comfortable taking a shower with men?

 

[whatevergirl]

Would you be comfortable taking a shower with men?

People of the opposite sex typically have their own showers…but good point. No, I wouldn’t. But, should a gay man have to admit he is gay, before entering the military? If you don’t know he is gay…then you wouldn’t know, and showering wouldn’t be an issue. Probably why the don’t ask don’t tell policy is in place, so straight and gay men can feel at ease. If you don’t know…then you don’t know.

 

[whatevergirl]

I just realized that this is in the social justice section…how is this a social ‘justice’ issue?

 

[estesbob]

People of the opposite sex typically have their own showers…but good point. No, I wouldn’t. But, should a gay man have to admit he is gay, before entering the military? If you don’t know he is gay…then you wouldn’t know, and showering wouldn’t be an issue. Probably why the don’t ask don’t tell policy is in place, so straight and gay men can feel at ease. If you don’t know…then you don’t know.

So far the dont ask dont tell seems to work fine. Its not a problem unless one announces they are a homosexual.

 

[pathia]

So far the dont ask dont tell seems to work fine. Its not a problem unless one announces they are a homosexual.

Things still happen that are unfortunate. I think there have been other murders, but this is the one I remember the most.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Winchell

 

[BrianK2007]

Does anyone know the official reasons why gays aren’t publicly and overtly allowed in the military?

Yes, green makes me look fat.

I have two minds about this 1) One if you can’t keep from outing yourself for 2-4 years you are not fit to serve. 2) You have an issue serving with a gay man you are not really fit to serve.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Openly homosexual persons are prohibited from serving in the military. Used to be, prior to President Clinton, the “openly” qualifier wasn’t applicable. The reasons were:

1. Homosexual behavior is immoral, and is thus outlawed under the UCMJ just as is adultery, for example.
2. Homosexual behavior bears serious social stigma which makes those who clandestinely engage in such behavior more subject to manipulation by foreign agents.
3. Those who engage in homosexual behavior are subject to much higher rates of various sexually transmitted diseases which endangers battlefield blood supplies.
4. Those who engage in homosexual behavior are subject to much higher rates of depression and drug/alcohol abuse, which are detrimental to military discipline. Similarly, the revulsion with which many people view homosexual behavior could also be detrimental to military discipline.

– Mark L. Chance.

In places of security are easier to blackmail. A security risk to all.

 

[estesbob]

Things still happen that are unfortunate. I think there have been other murders, but this is the one I remember the most.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Winchell

So are you suggesting that homosexuals be banned from the Military. I would g for that.

 

[estesbob]

Yes, green makes me look fat.

I have two minds about this 1) One if you can’t keep from outing yourself for 2-4 years you are not fit to serve. 2) You have an issue serving with a gay man you are not really fit to serve.

So you slime those serving our country becuase they dont share you view(a minority view) on the morality of Homoaexual behavior?

 

[BrianK2007]

Yup, you are there to serve. It’s not about you, it’s about your obligation to defend your country.

“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. [So help me God.]”

If your dislike of gays is more important to you thn the defense of freedom, you are not fit to serve. And at the same time, if having a chip on your shoulder about your sexuality is more important, you are not fit to serve. And as I do not live in North Korea I have a right to a minority view. However, I didn’t say word one about the morality of homosexual behavior nor did I “slime” anyone. I merely pointed out you are there to serve. There are homosexuals in the military far more than you may think.

My time in the Guard was very brief and not being able to serve because of my health is something that to this day gives me a feeling of sadness. Now 15 years later I can make jokes about it but at the time it was devastating. I wasn’t looking to prove anything I joined because I believed in freedom and it was worth fighting for. I still believe that. If that’s not why you joined, you are not worthy of the uniform. I’m an 34-year-old with one kidney and poor vision and if my country called me I’d go. I would serve proudly along side any man (or woman) who shared that belief. But I have no respect for someone who sees the military as some sort of club for the privileged. The only reason this country has remained free is because it’s citizens have always stood ready to defend it. If you don’t like gays, honey that’s so about YOU!