It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama to End Military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy

page: 7
8
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by paxnatus
I personally can't see how he can take on something so controversial at the beginning of his term. Wonder what the military has to say? We didn't become the strongest military
in the world without strict guidelines.


Are you insinuating that to allow gays into the army would weaken it?

If so, why?

No, no, no,

I am well aware that there are gay men and women in the military. I am referring to openly gay, which would repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'




The British Army has allowed gays to serve for a long time and some serving members (one an Officer in the Para's) have even undergone gender reallignment surgery and continued to serve. Are you implying the British Army is weak?

Whats your point, exactly?


No, no, no,

I am well aware that there are gay men and women in the military. I am referring to openly gay, which would repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'

To be perfectly honest, I need to take a break from my computer for a little bit. But if you really would like to understand my opinion, please read my post on pg.5

Thank you for your reply.

P.S. One of my best friends is from London!




posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by paxnatus

Obama to End Military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy


www.foxnews.com

WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama will allow gays to serve openly in the military by overturning the controversial "don't ask, don't tell" policy that marred President Clinton's first days in
office, according to incoming White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Ending Clinton's "Don't ask, don't tell policy" does nothing to change the laws prohibiting homosexuality in the military. If Obama just ends a policy to not actively look for violators of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). That does not end the prohibition on homosexuality in the UCMJ. Since the UCMJ is codified in laws, does Obama plan to ignore the laws or does he want to waste political capital getting the laws changed? Or is he going to just take the liberal position of ignoring laws that are inconvenient?



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by CharlesMartel
 


Ahh.....


Well then what IF he does change the legal limitation on Gays serving openly in the Military?

[edit on 19-1-2009 by HunkaHunka]



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   
Does it apply to the intelligence community? I remember they kicked quite a lot of 'islamic' translators because they declared they were gay. Finally the U.S. military might have to start being professionals. There is no difference between soldiers having to handle people of different gender, colours, ethnicity, religion, political and military beliefs and of having handle sexual preference.



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
This decision is one of lunacy and idiocy. I am currently enlisted in the Marine Corp and deployed to Iraq. I have no problem with "gay", dont know the political correct term, people in the military. I see no problem with it. They have the same desire to defend their country as I do and I commend them on this. The fact of the matter is I have quiet a few gay friends back where I am stationed.

I do not agree with Obama's decision on this basis. There is no problem with a gay military member, it only becomes a problem when this information is found out. It brings a whole new set of liabilities and limitations into the mix. For one, this person will most likely be an outcast within his enlisted ranks simply because he/she chooses to live a different life style. This person will be the blunt end of any and every joke. This will then be brought into the policy of discrimination and will therefore cause many people to loose rank along with any number of other things. They will then be treated with a different attitude, I hate to say this, just like females in the military. People do not realize how you have to tread on thin ice when it comes to females within the ranks. The idea of a gay member will just make things 10 times worse because this lifestyle is not yet accepted by a huge number of the American populus. Therefore, this is going to be a very bad decision in the long run and will eventually lead to very severe reprocusions within the ranks of all the armed forces of the military. I hate to say it, but the dont ask dont tell policy is the best defence for not only the heterosexual members of the service but also for the homosexual members. I guess we will just have to wait and see what comes of this. I can see nothing good coming of it however.



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Some lucky contractors will win bids to double the number of restrooms for the military.... homosexual men's and homosexual women's to go with the men's and women's. Might as well throw in "family" restrooms while at too, like the walmarts have.

Oh wait, gonna need to double the barracks too!

What to do about bi-sexuals???



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 09:49 PM
link   
My thoughts on the subject:

1. Straight men will be uncomfortable for awhile;

2. These men will realize that their lives haven't been fundamentally altered in any way;

3. These men will realize gays aren't attracted to every chest thumping, testosterone oozing soldier that walks by;

4. These men will be secretly pissed that the gay guy doesn't think that they are good looking;

5. These men will realize that gays actually "aren't that bad"l;

6. These men will, in one, five, or ten years, forget what it was like before DADT was repealled

7. We will have forgotten this entire argument, and instead be arguing about Masons, whether or not the new President will be the disclosure President, and when the Galactic Federation of Light will land.

Oh, and I'm sure there will be a few threads extolling the wonderful views of Representative Ron Paul and how he was "so right" about everything.



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Xversatile
 

"Finally the U.S. military might have to start being professionals. There is no difference between soldiers having to handle people of different gender, colours, ethnicity, religion, political and military beliefs and of having handle sexual preference."

Well guess what? Military life IS NOT Civilian Life! With that said this is not about letting gays into the service. This is about openly talking about your sexual preference and how repealing 'DADT' will greatly compromise all parties involved. This does nothing to lend itself to the support of our military men and women.

All I have heard about in MSM is how smart Obama is and how high his IQ
is. Yet, this is one of the most ignorant moves he could make. An act like this would prove he has no common sense. I am of the opinion he doesn't
but this would prove it!

Thank you, for all the thought provoking comments.

Pax



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 11:24 PM
link   
So much for the image of "An Officer and A Gentleman"!


So much for "The Few and the Proud"!



Perhaps old Jack was right, "You can't handle the truth!"; that a Gay man or Lesbian woman can be as good (or Better) a soldier as a straight man or woman.


Hate to invade your narrow little comfort zones, but, unless your high school had private showers (in which case you probably went to a very expensive, and very exclusive, private school, so you're not likely to be in the service) You, at one time or another, shared a shower and a locker-room with a homosexual!



There, now you're hopelessly traumatized!




Members of the military are expected to act in accordance to military discipline. That does not include harrassing their comrades for any reason.

Yes, I know violations of the ideal happen. When they do, and for whatever reason they do, we should expect the appropriate response.


That is part of the Discipline we should expect from the military.



Unless the Truth is that our military has become nothing more than just a bunch of Goons with Guns!



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


you are crazy ass hell do you not understand what that does to lesbians and gay who do serve out country thats like telling you that you couldny be in the military because of your belief. we have the right to be ourselves everywhere else but the military why is it so different... So you telling me you dont have respect for the lesbian and the gays who fight for you freedom but has to remain unhappy because they cant express how they feel. What kind of person are you



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by jd140
 


Once again the ignorance of homophobia raises its ugly head.

Being gay does not mean that a gay male will attack every male he sees. I love the conceit that a man is in a shower or even a room with a gay man that he will be hit on.

Just like every heterosexual female hits on them.


There is a larger occurence of male against male sexual assault in the military then male against female. Population differences considered.
It is 25% more.

And since the gay population is considerably less then that, is it is really gay males that we are worried about?

In this day and age it shouldn't even be an issue. The way I see it, gay or not, male or female, if you can survive the rigors of boot camp and you are willing to serve, it doesn't matter who or what you are.



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   
So many on this thread act out of fear.


When women were allowed to serve in combat missions there was all sorts of "It will be the downfall of the Service!" rhetoric.

This is nothing different. The only people who stand to lose are the homophobic.

I say upwards and onwards towards Progress!



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
When women were allowed to serve in combat missions there was all sorts of "It will be the downfall of the Service!" rhetoric.


Actually, there still several jobs that women aren't allowed to serve. They aren't in the Infantry, or AF TACP units. Those are just two off the top of my head.



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Seriously though, are you people for real? Are you trying to tell me if your home turf was invaded tomorrow, and they needed every able bodied man and woman to fight, they wouldn't conscript gays because 'they might look at our straight guys in the shower'?

If they're good enough to be conscripted then they deserve every right to go into the army. End of the day, these people are people, like you and me. They aren't animals, and deserve every right that any other person on the planet has.

It should depend solely on a man's competency and skill, not what sex he prefers.



posted on Jan, 20 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
ok i agree who is to say gays cant serve in the military... there are many that are serving today....... when we all go to training and we are in the shower we are not looking around to see if someone is looking at us we are like i need to hurry and get out because its crouded same when your down range or in the field. which comes to mind about the whole we dont ask a cop or doc or fireman if they are gay there are there to do one thing help you and save you in anyway possible. at that momment your not going to ask are you gay your going to say help me. same as the military when you are down in the sand box you are in fires way your not going to shout out i have a gay soldier here who is going to watch my back your going to rely on the person like you would a straight person to hold fire while you take cover and position yourself. we are asked to leave our loved ones behind to train to fight or for what ever reason and be there when we return even though there is a possibilty we wont come back.. what makes it any different that we can not say we love someone and let it be known so they are informed on your were abouts and they too can feel that they are just as important... we have any right to serve and shoot when we qualify take a fitness test or do other things the military ask who is to say that gays do it any different we are the same......



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by jd140
 


Once again the ignorance of homophobia raises its ugly head.

Being gay does not mean that a gay male will attack every male he sees. I love the conceit that a man is in a shower or even a room with a gay man that he will be hit on.

Just like every heterosexual female hits on them.


There is a larger occurence of male against male sexual assault in the military then male against female. Population differences considered.
It is 25% more.

And since the gay population is considerably less then that, is it is really gay males that we are worried about?

In this day and age it shouldn't even be an issue. The way I see it, gay or not, male or female, if you can survive the rigors of boot camp and you are willing to serve, it doesn't matter who or what you are.


I never said anything about being hit on.

Look at it this way.

Males do not share the same sleeping quarters with females.
Males do not shower with females at the same time.
Males do not share the same latrine as females.

Now why is it ok for gay soldiers to share these same things with straight people of the same sex?

Call me a homophobe if you want, I could really careless. I think that question is valid and by your reply to me it must be a hard one to answer since you didn't address the context of the post.

It is very easy to throw accusations.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by jd140

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by jd140
 


Once again the ignorance of homophobia raises its ugly head.

Being gay does not mean that a gay male will attack every male he sees. I love the conceit that a man is in a shower or even a room with a gay man that he will be hit on.

Just like every heterosexual female hits on them.


There is a larger occurence of male against male sexual assault in the military then male against female. Population differences considered.
It is 25% more.

And since the gay population is considerably less then that, is it is really gay males that we are worried about?

In this day and age it shouldn't even be an issue. The way I see it, gay or not, male or female, if you can survive the rigors of boot camp and you are willing to serve, it doesn't matter who or what you are.


I never said anything about being hit on.

Look at it this way.

Males do not share the same sleeping quarters with females.
Males do not shower with females at the same time.
Males do not share the same latrine as females.

Now why is it ok for gay soldiers to share these same things with straight people of the same sex?

Call me a homophobe if you want, I could really careless. I think that question is valid and by your reply to me it must be a hard one to answer since you didn't address the context of the post.

It is very easy to throw accusations.


The is why some of these facilities are not shared?

Generally it is safety for women. Being less able to defend themselves it is better to keep the two sexes seperated.

That and privacy. Women have cycles and tend to want to keep that knowledge to themselves.That is why.

But I think one male is capable of defending himself against another.The fact is, a male could be in a shower with any number of gay males and never know. Just like you don't know someone is a practicing jew or catholic unless the knowledge is revealed.

And there are plenty of situations where men and women do share facilities, astronauts for example.
In other countries, in dorms. And I think many men don't want women leerign at them any more then vice versa.

And probably a lot of reason for seperation is that one is cost, mens bathrooms with urinals is a lot cheaper, and a lot faster. If you combined bathrooms, you would have to have each stall and urinal sectioned off.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Gay men and Lesbians have always been in the armed forces, this is a fact. They have fought and died in many conflicts, this is also a fact. Why then should they be forced to hide in the shadows. If a hetrosexual soldier were to need time off to attend to a sick partner or even attend his/her spouses funeral they would not fear revealing the reason for wanting leave. How awful it must feel to hide your life away, to grieve in silence. Imagine not being able to be happy about falling in love. Or even sitting silently while others mock your 'kind' . The truth is this is another form of bigotry. No different from racism. They deserve better, if your good enough to kill and die for your country - no matter how dumb the conflict, then equality must be assured.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


Why do homosexuals feel the need to go about shouting to the world they they are in fact homosexuals?.

I don't go around telling everyone that I am heterosexual.

My opinion is that the homosexual community is not seeking the "right to exist" (which they already have, just like everyone else)... they are seeking respect and acceptance.

Respect and acceptance cannot be enforced by law.

Everyone (not only military) should just keep their sexual orientation to themselves, so we all can go on to dealing with more important issues.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 09:12 PM
link   
i will explain why i dont think dont ask dont tell should be removed.
no matter what you do in this world, there will still be haters. racists, homophopes....racist homophobes,lol,etc.
simple fact is, some people are really uncomfortable around gays.
most straight men do not want a gay man to "cover" them in a fox hole. that could lead to more "friendly fire" or accidental discharges if you know what i mean.



new topics




 
8
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join