It was only 50% for Army combat, and even less for the other branches. Also, the 60% figure for combat Marines is a little misleading. The survey also found that of Marines who had served with someone they believed to be gay, 90% said their unit’s performance was neutral, good, or very good, 88% said the same of unit cohesion, and 83% of unit morale. Numbers were similar for Marines serving under a gay leader.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.
As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.
Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]
He was “traumatized” because a gay guy hit on him?
Seems to me the only bold and aggresive men in the Navy left already are gay?
[/quote]
Something tells me you wouldn’t be downplaying this as much as if it were some guy doing that to your wife.[/quote]
If she went to “defend freedom” which inlcudes being shot at occasionally, I would expect her not to be “traumatized”.
[/quote]
So homosexual men that are sexually harassed in the military should just get over it too, right?
Either sexual harassment is a big deal or it isn’t.[/quote]
No.
If the physical abuse of women is endemic, which it was (is?) in the Navy that is in no way comparable to a guy that is “traumatized” because a man wanted to suck his dick.
Yes, traumatized. He didn’t know how to react. Where do u draw the line on being weirded out? Its just “flattering” to be hit on…just “flattering” to be asked if u want a blowjob while ur cock is out…cuz I mean as long as YOU’RE not gay its ok, right? Gonna laugh at trauma when you’re alone in your rack and u get raped? I guess rape is a “bold and aggressive” move. I’m just saying, this is one more distraction the military doesn’t need…its already goin to shit anyway.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.
As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.
Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]
He was “traumatized” because a gay guy hit on him?
Seems to me the only bold and aggresive men in the Navy left already are gay?
[/quote]
Something tells me you wouldn’t be downplaying this as much as if it were some guy doing that to your wife.[/quote]
If she went to “defend freedom” which inlcudes being shot at occasionally, I would expect her not to be “traumatized”.
[/quote]
So homosexual men that are sexually harassed in the military should just get over it too, right?
Either sexual harassment is a big deal or it isn’t.[/quote]
No.
If the physical abuse of women is endemic, which it was (is?) in the Navy that is in no way comparable to a guy that is “traumatized” because a man wanted to suck his dick.
[/quote]
So making unwanted sexual advances toward a woman is different than toward a man? It’s “endimic”.
I have some news for you, sexual harassment is in no was particular to the female gender.
And whether trauma was an exaggeration or not isn’t really the point…I’m hearing a lot of people argue that gay people keep to themselves, that if you’re comfortable with your sexuality you can get over it, and that it’s not as tho they’ll be targeting all the straight dudes for sex. Maybe not usually, but it DOES happen. The focus of the military should be warfighting, not deciding on the logistics of where to house gay people, wading through sexual assault charges, and giving briefs on tolerance and behavior with gays. Shit…just occurred to me, safety stand downs and other such briefs were tedious to begin with, I can only imagine how many more hours of conduct policy we’d have had to sit through.
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.
As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.
Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]
Your friend sounds like a weak minded pussy. He sounds at home in the Navy.
An adult would just say, “no, I’m not gay, leave me alone,” if a gay man made sexual advances towards him.
I would advise you to be a grown up and not allow petty bullshit to bother you. If all your semen bros catch teh ghey and unit cohesion is compromised, then talk to your first line supervisor about it. If that doesn’t work, attempt to talk to your Company level (whatever that is in the navy) Commander.
Either way, it’s only a big deal if you make it that way.
Thus concludes your Oak Tree e-counseling…
Exactly. Which is why strict military rules against sexual harassment should apply, regardless of the person’s sexual orientation.
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Yes, traumatized. He didn’t know how to react. Where do u draw the line on being weirded out? Its just “flattering” to be hit on…just “flattering” to be asked if u want a blowjob while ur cock is out…cuz I mean as long as YOU’RE not gay its ok, right? Gonna laugh at trauma when you’re alone in your rack and u get raped? I guess rape is a “bold and aggressive” move. I’m just saying, this is one more distraction the military doesn’t need…its already goin to shit anyway.[/quote]
So we are up now from comments about his dick to being raped in his sleep?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.
As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.
Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]
He was “traumatized” because a gay guy hit on him?
Seems to me the only bold and aggresive men in the Navy left already are gay?
[/quote]
Something tells me you wouldn’t be downplaying this as much as if it were some guy doing that to your wife.[/quote]
If she went to “defend freedom” which inlcudes being shot at occasionally, I would expect her not to be “traumatized”.
[/quote]
So homosexual men that are sexually harassed in the military should just get over it too, right?
Either sexual harassment is a big deal or it isn’t.[/quote]
No.
If the physical abuse of women is endemic, which it was (is?) in the Navy that is in no way comparable to a guy that is “traumatized” because a man wanted to suck his dick.
[/quote]
So making unwanted sexual advances toward a woman is different than toward a man? It’s “endimic”.
I have some news for you, sexual harassment is in no was particular to the female gender.[/quote]
The women had just a tad more to deal with than comments or little notes.
[quote]orion wrote:
The women had just a tad more to deal with than comments or little notes.[/quote]
Like?
So it’s different and wrong to sexually harass someone only if, they are dealing with a lot of other stuff?
I think the biggest problem the military will face now is during recruiting and recruit training. Especially recruit training. You already have a powder keg ready to go off when folks from New York, Alabama, Tennessee, and everywhere else are thrown together and have to do everything together. Eat, sleep, shower, shit, and everything else for months away from home and out of their comfort zone. It doesn’t surprise me that the majority of the military is okay with the repeal since these are folks with careers and/or have built close units through years of service together. The problems will be during and directly after recruit training especially once new marines or whatever are given some freedom after months of restriction and when boot camp balls are at an all time high.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
While I think ending this policy is good. I don�?�¢??t think it�?�¢??s an answer. While gays should be able to be who they are and fight for their country, so should people uncomfortable with situations this will create.
If per chance I wouldn�?�¢??t want to shower with a gay man in the room or bunk with one, I should still be able to serve my country too, right?
Additionally, if homosexuality is now an acceptable topic for people serving in the military it�?�¢??s got to be acceptable from all sides. If they are allowing people to come out in support of being homosexual, you must also allow people to express their beliefs on the subject even if they disagree with it.
Like I said, ending the policy is good, banning gays is wrong. But some things still need to be addressed. I don�?�¢??t know what the answer is.
[/quote]
Well to be honest soldiers were already showering with gays soldiers, just not openly gay soldiers. A soldier being openly gay doesn’t mean that he’ll automatically try to have an intimate relationship with a heterosexual soldier or harass a heterosexual soldier either. If someone is bothered by the thought of interacting with a gay soldier then they’re under no obligations to join the military or remain in the military.
[/quote]
Never said that they did. I Just wouldn’t be comfortable with it. It’s just who I am. Shouldn’t I be allowed to both be myself and serve?[/quote]
Sure, people can say they dislike the thought of serving with a homosexual, that dislike is patently irrelevant as to whether or not that soldier should be able to be openly gay while serving in the military though.
[quote]Dustin wrote:
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.
As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.
Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]
Your friend sounds like a weak minded pussy. He sounds at home in the Navy.
An adult would just say, “no, I’m not gay, leave me alone,” if a gay man made sexual advances towards him.
I would advise you to be a grown up and not allow petty bullshit to bother you. If all your semen bros catch teh ghey and unit cohesion is compromised, then talk to your first line supervisor about it. If that doesn’t work, attempt to talk to your Company level (whatever that is in the navy) Commander.
Either way, it’s only a big deal if you make it that way.
Thus concludes your Oak Tree e-counseling…[/quote]
Weak minded pussy, huh? He came from a pretty rural area of the country, and I’m not sure if he’d ever even encountered a gay dude before. And that is exactly how he responded, telling the dude to leave him alone…but at what point do you get freaked out? He was repeatedly asked, and when he said no was advised to “close your eyes and imagine it’s a girl”. I like your attitude though, maybe we can start telling all victims of harassment to stop being “weak-minded pussies”. And while it might be a bit of a leap to go from this to rape, who knows where dismissing a sailor’s discomfort like this will lead? Quit bitching and grow up guys, it’s only group sex in the shower!
Oh and sweet dude, I’m ultra impressed that you know how a chain of command works. Not that it has anything to do with this. And I’m outta the Navy, for the record.
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
[quote]Dustin wrote:
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.
As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.
Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]
Your friend sounds like a weak minded pussy. He sounds at home in the Navy.
An adult would just say, “no, I’m not gay, leave me alone,” if a gay man made sexual advances towards him.
I would advise you to be a grown up and not allow petty bullshit to bother you. If all your semen bros catch teh ghey and unit cohesion is compromised, then talk to your first line supervisor about it. If that doesn’t work, attempt to talk to your Company level (whatever that is in the navy) Commander.
Either way, it’s only a big deal if you make it that way.
Thus concludes your Oak Tree e-counseling…[/quote]
Weak minded pussy, huh? He came from a pretty rural area of the country, and I’m not sure if he’d ever even encountered a gay dude before. And that is exactly how he responded, telling the dude to leave him alone…but at what point do you get freaked out? He was repeatedly asked, and when he said no was advised to “close your eyes and imagine it’s a girl”. I like your attitude though, maybe we can start telling all victims of harassment to stop being “weak-minded pussies”. And while it might be a bit of a leap to go from this to rape, who knows where dismissing a sailor’s discomfort like this will lead? Quit bitching and grow up guys, it’s only group sex in the shower!
Oh and sweet dude, I’m ultra impressed that you know how a chain of command works. Not that it has anything to do with this. And I’m outta the Navy, for the record.[/quote]
Yes, I’m sure gay men will have massive orgies in the showers. They wont be reprimanded or anything. I suppose military conveys will also start resembling gay pride parades as well.
No, they won’t be reprimanded. Lesbo ho’s all over the place were fuckin on the boat, and each time anyone tried to raise a flag, it got dismissed with a counseling chit (nothing). The gay issue is too controversial for anybody in charge to wanna deal with, so the lowly enlisted people are left to manage the consequences. As it was gays were already flaunting the fact that they pissed all over the UCMJ, I can only imagine what kind of “celebrations” will go on after DADT is gone. Parades? Probably. Gay people love parades.
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
While I think ending this policy is good. I don�??�?�¢??t think it�??�?�¢??s an answer. While gays should be able to be who they are and fight for their country, so should people uncomfortable with situations this will create.
If per chance I wouldn�??�?�¢??t want to shower with a gay man in the room or bunk with one, I should still be able to serve my country too, right?
Additionally, if homosexuality is now an acceptable topic for people serving in the military it�??�?�¢??s got to be acceptable from all sides. If they are allowing people to come out in support of being homosexual, you must also allow people to express their beliefs on the subject even if they disagree with it.
Like I said, ending the policy is good, banning gays is wrong. But some things still need to be addressed. I don�??�?�¢??t know what the answer is.
[/quote]
Well to be honest soldiers were already showering with gays soldiers, just not openly gay soldiers. A soldier being openly gay doesn’t mean that he’ll automatically try to have an intimate relationship with a heterosexual soldier or harass a heterosexual soldier either. If someone is bothered by the thought of interacting with a gay soldier then they’re under no obligations to join the military or remain in the military.
[/quote]
Never said that they did. I Just wouldn’t be comfortable with it. It’s just who I am. Shouldn’t I be allowed to both be myself and serve?[/quote]
Sure, people can say they dislike the thought of serving with a homosexual, that dislike is patently irrelevant as to whether or not that soldier should be able to be openly gay while serving in the military though.[/quote]
First of all, I’d like to say I understand what Doubleduce is saying. People are all for tolerance unless its an opinion of intolerance…you could say they’re intolerant to anything but tolerance. Why is my point of view met with so much hate?
Second, its VERY relevant. If gays are such a minor inconvenience, why not respect the wishes of the majority? Even in the studies where those opposed to the repeal made up a lesser percentage than those for it, are we gonna ignore the rest? Because it was either “I don’t care” or “hell no”, so it’s not like you’d be upsetting anyone either way, only ONE of these options will piss people off. Here’s a thought: how many soldiers and sailors will we lose in favor of the gay dudes we gain?
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
While I think ending this policy is good. I don�??�??�??�?�¢??t think it�??�??�??�?�¢??s an answer. While gays should be able to be who they are and fight for their country, so should people uncomfortable with situations this will create.
If per chance I wouldn�??�??�??�?�¢??t want to shower with a gay man in the room or bunk with one, I should still be able to serve my country too, right?
Additionally, if homosexuality is now an acceptable topic for people serving in the military it�??�??�??�?�¢??s got to be acceptable from all sides. If they are allowing people to come out in support of being homosexual, you must also allow people to express their beliefs on the subject even if they disagree with it.
Like I said, ending the policy is good, banning gays is wrong. But some things still need to be addressed. I don�??�??�??�?�¢??t know what the answer is.
[/quote]
Well to be honest soldiers were already showering with gays soldiers, just not openly gay soldiers. A soldier being openly gay doesn’t mean that he’ll automatically try to have an intimate relationship with a heterosexual soldier or harass a heterosexual soldier either. If someone is bothered by the thought of interacting with a gay soldier then they’re under no obligations to join the military or remain in the military.
[/quote]
Never said that they did. I Just wouldn’t be comfortable with it. It’s just who I am. Shouldn’t I be allowed to both be myself and serve?[/quote]
Sure, people can say they dislike the thought of serving with a homosexual, that dislike is patently irrelevant as to whether or not that soldier should be able to be openly gay while serving in the military though.[/quote]
First of all, I’d like to say I understand what Doubleduce is saying. People are all for tolerance unless its an opinion of intolerance…you could say they’re intolerant to anything but tolerance. Why is my point of view met with so much hate?
Second, its VERY relevant. If gays are such a minor inconvenience, why not respect the wishes of the majority? Even in the studies where those opposed to the repeal made up a lesser percentage than those for it, are we gonna ignore the rest? Because it was either “I don’t care” or “hell no”, so it’s not like you’d be upsetting anyone either way, only ONE of these options will piss people off. Here’s a thought: how many soldiers and sailors will we lose in favor of the gay dudes we gain?
[/quote]
In regards to your first paragraph; LOL. I don’t know, probably because you advocate discrimination.
How many soldiers did we lose because of integration? Come to think of it, the majority of soldiers most likely didn’t support desegregation either. Did that mean citizens of this country should have been denied rights they’re and were entitled to?
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
No, they won’t be reprimanded. Lesbo ho’s all over the place were fuckin on the boat, and each time anyone tried to raise a flag, it got dismissed with a counseling chit (nothing). The gay issue is too controversial for anybody in charge to wanna deal with, so the lowly enlisted people are left to manage the consequences. As it was gays were already flaunting the fact that they pissed all over the UCMJ, I can only imagine what kind of “celebrations” will go on after DADT is gone. Parades? Probably. Gay people love parades.[/quote]
I think heterosexuals enjoyed pissing on it too with the rampant sexual harassment that exists in the military.
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
While I think ending this policy is good. I don�??�??�??�??�?�¢??t think it�??�??�??�??�?�¢??s an answer. While gays should be able to be who they are and fight for their country, so should people uncomfortable with situations this will create.
If per chance I wouldn�??�??�??�??�?�¢??t want to shower with a gay man in the room or bunk with one, I should still be able to serve my country too, right?
Additionally, if homosexuality is now an acceptable topic for people serving in the military it�??�??�??�??�?�¢??s got to be acceptable from all sides. If they are allowing people to come out in support of being homosexual, you must also allow people to express their beliefs on the subject even if they disagree with it.
Like I said, ending the policy is good, banning gays is wrong. But some things still need to be addressed. I don�??�??�??�??�?�¢??t know what the answer is.
[/quote]
Well to be honest soldiers were already showering with gays soldiers, just not openly gay soldiers. A soldier being openly gay doesn’t mean that he’ll automatically try to have an intimate relationship with a heterosexual soldier or harass a heterosexual soldier either. If someone is bothered by the thought of interacting with a gay soldier then they’re under no obligations to join the military or remain in the military.
[/quote]
Never said that they did. I Just wouldn’t be comfortable with it. It’s just who I am. Shouldn’t I be allowed to both be myself and serve?[/quote]
Sure, people can say they dislike the thought of serving with a homosexual, that dislike is patently irrelevant as to whether or not that soldier should be able to be openly gay while serving in the military though.[/quote]
First of all, I’d like to say I understand what Doubleduce is saying. People are all for tolerance unless its an opinion of intolerance…you could say they’re intolerant to anything but tolerance. Why is my point of view met with so much hate?
Second, its VERY relevant. If gays are such a minor inconvenience, why not respect the wishes of the majority? Even in the studies where those opposed to the repeal made up a lesser percentage than those for it, are we gonna ignore the rest? Because it was either “I don’t care” or “hell no”, so it’s not like you’d be upsetting anyone either way, only ONE of these options will piss people off. Here’s a thought: how many soldiers and sailors will we lose in favor of the gay dudes we gain?
[/quote]
In regards to your first paragraph; LOL. I don’t know, probably because you advocate discrimination.
How many soldiers did we lose because of integration? Come to think of it, the majority of soldiers most likely didn’t support desegregation either. Did that mean citizens of this country should have been denied rights they’re and were entitled to?
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
No, they won’t be reprimanded. Lesbo ho’s all over the place were fuckin on the boat, and each time anyone tried to raise a flag, it got dismissed with a counseling chit (nothing). The gay issue is too controversial for anybody in charge to wanna deal with, so the lowly enlisted people are left to manage the consequences. As it was gays were already flaunting the fact that they pissed all over the UCMJ, I can only imagine what kind of “celebrations” will go on after DADT is gone. Parades? Probably. Gay people love parades.[/quote]
I think heterosexuals enjoyed pissing on it too with the rampant sexual harassment that exists in the military.
[/quote]
I’m tired of the gay and race comparisons. Without getting into the whole argument of whether being gay is a choice or not, I don’t see it as the same thing at all. Citizens aren’t being denied rights, gay people people still serve. Kinda hard to hide the fact you’re black, easy to hide the fact you’re gay. One’s a behavior, the other…you get the idea.
Lol what sexual harassment? Were you in the military? Of course it happens, but rampant? No. I’m assuming you mean harassment of females perpetrated by males. This just isn’t true, for several reasons. For one, most military females are disgusting. For two, even a whiff of anything close to harassment can end a career. Where did you come by this piece of info that harassment is rampant in the military?
Oh, and you missed my point about tolerance. If you’re intolerant to intolerance, you’re just as intolerant as me, making you a hypocrite.
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Oh, and you missed my point about tolerance. If you’re intolerant to intolerance, you’re just as intolerant as me, making you a hypocrite.[/quote]
No, you’re assuming you made a point.
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]goldengloves wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
While I think ending this policy is good. I don�??�??�??�??�??�?�¢??t think it�??�??�??�??�??�?�¢??s an answer. While gays should be able to be who they are and fight for their country, so should people uncomfortable with situations this will create.
If per chance I wouldn�??�??�??�??�??�?�¢??t want to shower with a gay man in the room or bunk with one, I should still be able to serve my country too, right?
Additionally, if homosexuality is now an acceptable topic for people serving in the military it�??�??�??�??�??�?�¢??s got to be acceptable from all sides. If they are allowing people to come out in support of being homosexual, you must also allow people to express their beliefs on the subject even if they disagree with it.
Like I said, ending the policy is good, banning gays is wrong. But some things still need to be addressed. I don�??�??�??�??�??�?�¢??t know what the answer is.
[/quote]
Well to be honest soldiers were already showering with gays soldiers, just not openly gay soldiers. A soldier being openly gay doesn’t mean that he’ll automatically try to have an intimate relationship with a heterosexual soldier or harass a heterosexual soldier either. If someone is bothered by the thought of interacting with a gay soldier then they’re under no obligations to join the military or remain in the military.
[/quote]
Never said that they did. I Just wouldn’t be comfortable with it. It’s just who I am. Shouldn’t I be allowed to both be myself and serve?[/quote]
Sure, people can say they dislike the thought of serving with a homosexual, that dislike is patently irrelevant as to whether or not that soldier should be able to be openly gay while serving in the military though.[/quote]
First of all, I’d like to say I understand what Doubleduce is saying. People are all for tolerance unless its an opinion of intolerance…you could say they’re intolerant to anything but tolerance. Why is my point of view met with so much hate?
Second, its VERY relevant. If gays are such a minor inconvenience, why not respect the wishes of the majority? Even in the studies where those opposed to the repeal made up a lesser percentage than those for it, are we gonna ignore the rest? Because it was either “I don’t care” or “hell no”, so it’s not like you’d be upsetting anyone either way, only ONE of these options will piss people off. Here’s a thought: how many soldiers and sailors will we lose in favor of the gay dudes we gain?
[/quote]
In regards to your first paragraph; LOL. I don’t know, probably because you advocate discrimination.
How many soldiers did we lose because of integration? Come to think of it, the majority of soldiers most likely didn’t support desegregation either. Did that mean citizens of this country should have been denied rights they’re and were entitled to?
[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
No, they won’t be reprimanded. Lesbo ho’s all over the place were fuckin on the boat, and each time anyone tried to raise a flag, it got dismissed with a counseling chit (nothing). The gay issue is too controversial for anybody in charge to wanna deal with, so the lowly enlisted people are left to manage the consequences. As it was gays were already flaunting the fact that they pissed all over the UCMJ, I can only imagine what kind of “celebrations” will go on after DADT is gone. Parades? Probably. Gay people love parades.[/quote]
I think heterosexuals enjoyed pissing on it too with the rampant sexual harassment that exists in the military.
[/quote]
I’m tired of the gay and race comparisons. Without getting into the whole argument of whether being gay is a choice or not, I don’t see it as the same thing at all. Citizens aren’t being denied rights, gay people people still serve. Kinda hard to hide the fact you’re black, easy to hide the fact you’re gay. One’s a behavior, the other…you get the idea.
Lol what sexual harassment? Were you in the military? Of course it happens, but rampant? No. I’m assuming you mean harassment of females perpetrated by males. This just isn’t true, for several reasons. For one, most military females are disgusting. For two, even a whiff of anything close to harassment can end a career. Where did you come by this piece of info that harassment is rampant in the military?[/quote]
They can be serve unless they’re openly gay, then they’re kicked out of the military. Are openly heterosexual members of the military also going to be kicked out?
This sexual harassment: BBC NEWS | Americas | Women at war face sexual violence “They were not exceptions. According to several studies of the US military funded by the Department of Veteran Affairs, 30% of military women are raped while serving, 71% are sexually assaulted, and 90% are sexually harassed.”