Federal court rules against military gays policy

reply to post by Annee


I just feel that this is something that the next generation is probably going to deal with a lot better. They will be more conservative in nature, with their bodies anyway, (its a trend thing, I don't have the reference here) and there will be a whole generation of children raised in gay households to further the assimilation of the two cultures. It's funny, the whole gay marriage thing is changing a lot of independents minds because it steps away from the sex soaked gay movements of the late 80's and early 90's. Like I said, and it did change my mind, it's the over-sexualization of our culture that has bothered me. Seeing two guys being all "coupley" bothers me none. And I would rather be around that any day over some high schoolish hetero couple macking all over each other. Does any of this make sense?

I am not, nor have I ever been in the military, but I come from a family with a long military background, and so does my wife.

I wanted to weigh in on this topic, so here's my two cents. Bash it if you like, but before you bash it, please read the entire post, and see if you think that what I'm saying may make a little sense to you.

I think it's a horrible idea to remove the policy that's in place.

First of all, let's look at an analogy. I never joined the military when I was younger. At times, I wanted to, but I was simply too fat. At one point (at about age 20) my weight reached 310 pounds. The military simply will not accept people who are over a certain weight limit. I felt very hurt and angry because the military had, in my mind, simply said that I'm not good enough. But that's not what was really going on.

The military operates in a certain manner so that they can be as efficient as possible. Whether anyone knows it or not, the fact is that they have droves of legal experts, psychologists, strategists, and every other relevant profession whose entire careers are devoted to making the military as efficient as possible. Using these think-tanks, they have developed a system that makes our military the most elite in the world.

Now, that being said, let's go back to my scenario. I was severely overweight during that time of my life, and the fact is, I wouldn't fit into their system. How does all of this relate?

Well, nowadays, I weigh 185 pounds. This means that I could still enter the military (I haven't QUITE aged out yet!), if I wanted to. Why? Because now I fit their system. I discovered something in my weight loss that I didn't understand before: We are NOT whatever we happen to be, but we are what we choose to be. In other words, I can't say that being fat is who I am. I'm not inherently fat. From looking at my family, it is clear that we have genes that may predispose me to be fat, but I'm fat because I choose to be fat. I choose to indulge in the easy pleasure of eating and relaxing a lot. It felt good when I lived that way, because I'm wired to be like that. But when I chose to be healthy, I went against my wiring in the hopes that I would become healthier. I now adhere to a different standard of life that is completely backwards from how I'm predisposed, and though it's hard sometimes, I feel much better, and my projected lifespan has increased a great deal.

The military is looking for people who are able to maintain their idea of honor, integrity, self control, and morality, because having people who share their approach to life is integral to the efficiency of the war machine. It's an issue of efficiency and effectiveness, and we really should just leave it alone.

Thanks for reading.

Bash away.

Good... excellent even. As long as it is not with children, the dead or small furry animals the military has no right discriminating against anyone because of their sexual preferences.

Why not just build partitioned showers instead of open ones? The open ones are kind of gay by default anyway.

Also, what is the military's stance on bisexuals? Are they the same as plain gay?

I genuinely want to know, I'm not trying to be funny or something.

reply to post by endless_observer

I know I said I'd bow out but:

Congratulations on your weight loss. My lifestyle, unlike your weight problem, isn't unhealthy...it is a natural healthy expression of who I am. If I were to try to become straight (which you likened to loosing weight, though, in not so many words) I would become dramatically unhealthy - and mostly likely a drunk. I would become severely depressed, very resentful and even suicidal - I know this because I tried to be straight, for years. Matter of fact, I'm lucky I'm still alive.

So, congratulations on your weight loss and on your endorsement of government sponsored discrimination.

reply to post by endless_observer


You've "chosen" to be thin...

Now "Choose" to be Gay.


Betcha can't do it! Can you?


The military didn't wwant you when you were overweight because in many of the situations you'd encounter as a soldier you would have been a health risk to yourself and your commrades.


It had Nothing to do with "The Military Way".

reply to post by jasonjnelson


Hey Jason,

I agree with you about the over-sexualization of our society and I wanted to comment about why the gay movement of the 80's was so sexual.

If you look at our media - even dating back to the 60's you'll see one trend concerning gay men. We were all over the place - from variety tv like the Carol Burnett Show to night time television and we were usually the comedians. However, while we were allowed to be the funny best friend, or the funny smart ass, or the hairdresser ( which usually consisted of being either the funny best friend or the smart-ass) we were never depicted as being the fully realized sexual beings that we are. And in the 80's we got tired of it and so we showed America and the rest of the world just how sexual we can be. Was it necessarily a good thing, no, it was reckless. Thousands upon thousands of people became sick or died; however, it was the first time that we decided that we were tired of being locked up in the closet and that, most certainly was a good thing. Because of them, we're discussing this issue right now. Coincidentally, the first daytime gay kiss on prime time didn't happen until Dawson's Creek in 1998. It took nearly 10 years for the first gay kiss to happen on daytime tv (As the World Turns.)

Cheers.

[edit on 23/5/08 by WickedStar]

Oh but wait - I survived the 80s too - Sex - Drugs - Rock & Roll - AND acceptance of everyone and most everything.

I remember wall to wall mattresses on the floor - rolling over having sex with whoever was next to you. But I'm Not Gay. It was not just a gay thing.

Everyone came "out" at that time - not just gays. Once you are Out - you are out - you don't go back.

Women - Gays - Blacks - Liberals - - it was such a Magical time.

How did the pendulum swing back to Conservative/Religious? How did we allow that to happen?

I have been to the Long Beach Gay Pride parade and fair. Yes those in the parade look like Mardi Gras. But most were there with family. You know "normal" - jeans - t-shirts - Nike's.

The stereotype TV/media portrays is insulting. It's no different then portraying all blacks as "steppin' fetchits" or shoe shine boys.

"gay" - the last allowed Comedy prejudice. Can't make fun of blacks or other ethnics - - but its still a free for all to make gay jokes.

Its time to be adults.

reply to post by Annee



Well said.

reply to post by WickedStar and Annee


I'm not sure what Annee was getting at, but if you come back to read this, I wanted to "close out" as well. I hope that we run across each other again, as I have added you to my friends list. This has been the best and most open thread I have been a part of, and I am proud to say I started it... Now here goes...


When I was growing up, I was raised within the confines of a "christian" home. I can say without a doubt that my parents, (ps, I'm adopted) are some of the most loving people I know, and they love God with all their hearts. But sadly, they are bigots. They, in their hearts, are disgusted by gay people. I know, that when they get to heaven, they will have to answer for that. How showing and sharing God's love was not important enough for them to get over this.
But I can understand some part of how they feel. Is it because I feel the same way? No! But I have already answered that. So let me explain why, with a question. Are Iranian children and young adults responsible for the way they feel about Jews? How about Turkish children and young adults and their view of the Armenian genocide? How about my grandfather, the most racist person I have ever known? Are people responsible for the indoctrination they have known their whole lives?
I once asked a theologian about little island kids in the 14th century who never even knew who the heck Jesus was, and that it was necessary to be "saved". He answered me almost right away, saying that he believed we were responsible for how we felt and acted, when we knew the difference, and that God had a separate set of rules until you were exposed to the gospel. So I have gone way off point, right? No, I think I am right on.
The holier than thou attitude that people carry, whether it be "greenies" and the environment,, Christians and their faith, or even Annee, no offense, is what keeps people from understanding the very diverse ways of thinking and living that we have all experienced. No one is any more enlightened than another, we just all have our own views.
I have been to pro-life rallies, and gay pride parades. I have protested our gov't, and stopped others from burning flags. I have lived and thought so many different ways, but I make it a point to talk with people, hear their views, and figure out how I want to impact those around me. Yes, it is possible for me to fully support the gay movement, and still think that two dudes getting it on is gross. When I was in high school, I used to think that two girls were gross, and so on. My view for what is pleasing to the eye does in no way impact how I interact with ANYONE. I just avoid young couples, of any sex, as I know that they can't wait to just shove their tongue down each others throat. I still go out with gay couples, just mature ones. I know that to some of you, the open sexuality of the 60's, 70's and 80's was a wonderful time. But quite frankly, I take a look at all the havoc wreaked across three decades and wonder how family units ever survived.
I know, morality and modesty will forever be linked with religion in most peoples minds. But lets be honest, since I see the trend of the 30-40 something gay men moving towards nesting, I now know that maybe the family unit was not forced by religion. Maybe, for a large swath of the public, they see the stable elements needed for a thriving society. Maybe morality and modesty don't have to be about religion.

Maybe it can be about respect, for ones self, and for others. Maybe it can be about understanding the impact of this type of behavior on our mental and physical health. I don't know, it can be anything, but it doesn't have to be religion. And there is nothing wrong with people saying that the over-sexualization of our society is a bad thing. That it has no place. And that is why you don't see the same sort of backlash towards family units of gay males that there was in the 80's towards the young swinger types.
Now I know, you are thinking, hey, people are against gay marriage! Well, this has a lot to do with my previous statements about the old perception of the gay lifestyle. It might help to change the word, or whatever, but how about we just change the attitude by setting examples. I'm sorry, but that is what it will take.
You cannot force people to give up long held beliefs, especially when these peoples feelings are a big part of who they are. You don't like it when someone tells you they are wrong, so you cannot do the same. This debate, and others like it, with proper examples as well, does so much more to further a mutual goal, and understanding.
So gays in the military, and openly? I don't think it is our place in this time to set that mark. I think it takes, as I mentioned previously, a different approach. But I believe that there is no way these types of debates would have happened openly just ten years ago, so a little hurray for progress. But mostly, it is going to take the common understanding that neither side can be right all the time. Neither side.
Gays will serve openly, following the same code of conduct as others, when this social evolution has commenced. Too soon, and I think one forgets the damage that may be wrought to both sides.
Thanks for the conversation, and I will check back if you have anything to add or clarify, but otherwise, I think that we got as far as we are going to get without more participation from more military, active duty. Thanks-Jason



[edit on 24-5-2008 by jasonjnelson]

Originally posted by endless_observer
Ithe world.

The military is looking for people who are able to maintain their idea of honor, integrity, self control, and morality, because having people who share their approach to life is integral to the efficiency of the war machine. It's an issue of efficiency and effectiveness, and we really should just leave it alone.

Thanks for reading.

Bash away.

Currently the military allows people to join without disclosing their sexual orientation, but it is illegal for members to participate in homosexual relationships and sex with a member of the same gender. I dont see a difference in this policy and asking heterosexual members to not engage in heterosexual dating and relations. Would it be fair to ask all military to remain single and celibate? It is unreasonable, of course. IMO they should treat gay relationships as they do dating realtionships between men and women and not get involved unless it affects readiness and job performance. I dont see how homosexuals are not able to maintain self control, integrity, or morality. In fact, they are doing it already- they just
dont tell" and we "dont ask".

And Im not bashing- just in case it seems like that. I do understand why there are standards for military members. I just dont feel like sexual preference makes any difference.

One word jasonjnelson - Humanism

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by ldunquist


If you engage in any homosexual activity, which would happen if you are bi as well , you would be separated under the current policy. You can be as gay or bi as you want to be, but you must not engage in homosexual activities. They wont ask you when you join, commanders and supervisors are not allowed to ask out of the blue. If you get caught "inflagrante delecto" or turn yourself in to your chain of command you are out. There has to be sufficient evidence for them to prove a person is gay, though, and I imagine with retainability being in trouble right now, it is probably a little harder to be separated for homosexuality.

I am highly impressed and proud of this conversation, It is one of the few highly intelligent logical yet compassionate conversations I have seen on this topic. Kudos!

I truly feel if women can integrate into such a highly male driven testosterone filled enviroment and do so safely and successfully than this is more than possible.

But also I dont understand how so many feel it is a choice, I mean do you actively make a choice to be attracted to women, really did you have a conversation with yourself where it came down to having to pick between the two and well women seemed the better choice?

All to many times I have seen people who were truly gay make the "choice" to live a straight lifestyle because they craved a family and monogamy and children...... and while understandable it usually ends up with hurt and broken hearts and more pain than being true to oneself could ever have caused.

reply to post by gluetrap


If it is possible to say, I actually gave myself a clear headed evenings thought about it. I did it because a very close friend asked me if I ever had. The end result, in a word, no. (this was a solo nights thought)
I believe that there are many things that sculpt us. Who knows why the human brain is the way it is. But I feel that there are too many "bi" girls and guys dismiss my theory off hand. The fact is, are you telling me some people are born sociopat... wait...ha ha...

See what I did there? I almost pulled a Hillary...

The fact remains, that I am not making this the crux of my argument. I am saying, to have expected the slave owners and the slaves to get along after the emancipation proclamation...
"hey Bill, how's the plantation going?"

"Not good, short on help. Say, sorry about that whole, you know, whipping you and selling off your children, and making your wife carry babies for me."

"Oh, forget about it man, lets just move on. Want to come by for a BBQ later?"

... is about the same as expecting about half our population to just switch off their indoctrinated minds about this. therefore, their feelings have to be considered when such a broad move is made. I'm sorry that I feel so strongly about this, but I want to express that my argument is more of a devil's advocacy. I know how people are.

Did anyone even read my post? There were a few comments on it, but it looks like you folks picked out something that you could use to refute me without getting the point of the post.

Both being overweight and participation in homosexual acts are natural, if you CHOOSE to give yourself over to a thoughts and social situations that lead to those things. Lack of restraint is lack of restraint, no matter how you paint it. Let me make my point very clear:

YOU ARE NOT DEFINED BY WHATEVER GENES YOU HAPPEN TO POSSESS THAT INCLINE YOU TOWARDS ONE BEHAVIOR OR ANOTHER. YOU ARE DEFINED BY WHO YOU CHOOSE TO BE.

(Please don't accept the above as yelling, as it wasn't intended as such. I capitalized it because it is the most important point of the post, and if folks read my post and catch nothing else, I hope they remember that part.)