I'm gay and to be honest, if you expect me to follow my nations laws, pay the taxes and contribute to sociolty, then i should be allowed to defend it too.

Considering the US is ment to be a global leader, the only super power left, the US really is socially 25 years behind Europe, wake up America, the world is falling apart, does it matter what your sexuality is when it comes to saving your union?

And in refernce to the STI thing, its a known fact that HIV/AIDS infections are rising in hetrosexuals, and not homosexuals.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I hope you're right and he does ask for a repeal. More importantly, I hope it happens.

Liberals have never gotten the idea to sink in that the military isn't a social experiment for them.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You mean like our military men raping women right and left? Yeah, being straight really keeps the deviant behavior out of the military, huh?

Yeah, you're right. Just yesterday, when I was heading over to the snack room to get a diet Coke and some Twizzlers, I had to step over another Airman raping a female Airman. Damn devients.

Get a grip. How many women have been raped in your home town? Doesn't make it right, but how about seeing the problem from ground level and not on that high horse?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
"Uncomfortable"? I love this argument. It's the most ridiculous one of them all. So, the big manly, soldier is "uncomfortable" with homosexuals, huh? Awww... poor wus! I can just see the big soldier telling his Sargent that his pillow is "uncomfortable" or that he's "uncomfortable" having to march through the mud. I'd love to see that. My answer to that is, "Well, GET comfortable, soldier"!!!

I love when people that aren't in the military run their suck and talk smack. It's so cute! And I love how they want to make the decisions on who can join and who can't, and they aren't the ones that will have to deal with the problems that will arise from that decision.

This is a difficult topic. There are many questions that would be raised and then brought up on such. True, most military men and women would say openly that they would be uncomfortable about serving with a person who is openly gay, however, on the battle field under combat conditions, most preconceptions would go out the window and the concern would be, can and will the person do their job for which they were trained to do.
But lets go beyond that, the question I would have, if I was either in the military, or having been in the military or in the process of being discharged, what would the ramifications be for those who have been removed from service on those grounds recently? And those who were removed years ago? What would such do for them? Reinstatement into the military, or a restoration of benifits, or even a payoff for them not to say anything? I know military personal, both those who are gay and straight and this is not an issue that is easily addressed or taken lightly.

"Don't ask, don't tell."

A dumb move on Clinton's part, but it was a step in the right direction, what it was about was enabling gay citizens to join the military, and it restricted the military from asking questions about a person's sexual preference.

What it should be is, "I don't give a damn."

Sexual orientation has no bearing on whether or not a person can fight effectively. To prove this point, look up the ancient Greeks and how they fought.

Anyone who feels weird around gay people is 99 per cent closeted themselves.Scientists have proved it already.....kay?

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

This isn't about civil rights or the weaker sex. The single thing I don't want to see women doing is killing people, even in war. Call me sexist IDC, I think women are too good for such violent roles.

Oh well don't worry. Men have made that choice for us.

Many women want to be treated equal - which means being on the front line.

But MAN - - has decided we are too delicate for such things.

Good old Man.

Originally posted by whatukno
"Don't ask, don't tell."

A dumb move on Clinton's part, but it was a step in the right direction, what it was about was enabling gay citizens to join the military, and it restricted the military from asking questions about a person's sexual preference.

Clinton wanted to allow gays to be open in the military. He was prevented from doing so.

The Presidency is "group thought" -- it is not a single person.

mea culpa! mea culpa! mea culpa!
I said I had not heard fox report on this today. However, I had not logged on to The Fox Nation, or Fox News.com

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

This isn't about civil rights or the weaker sex. The single thing I don't want to see women doing is killing people, even in war. Call me sexist IDC, I think women are too good for such violent roles.

Oh well don't worry. Men have made that choice for us.

Many women want to be treated equal - which means being on the front line.

But MAN - - has decided we are too delicate for such things.

Good old Man.

LOL. I AM an old man, you got that right,

Allow meto rephrase that. I cannot image having my mother or my step-daughter or granddaughter ever being drafted and sent to war. If we were ever actually attacked as a nation I'd be happy to stand next to them on the firing line (my mom is a markswoman).
Since the majority of soldiers HAPPEN to be men, agreed? and 2) Men DO often act quite stupid around women, right? men lose their #e (beg pardon) around women we can't mix them together well in combat units.
Keep women units SEPARATE from men, then OK, that's fine. I could NEVER see women being drafted and sent to combat units, that's really what I would like to avoid.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals


LOL. I AM an old man, you got that right,

Allow meto rephrase that. I cannot image having my mother or my step-daughter or granddaughter ever being drafted and sent to war. If we were ever actually attacked as a nation I'd be happy to stand next to them on the firing line (my mom is a markswoman).
Since the majority of soldiers HAPPEN to be men, agreed? and 2) Men DO often act quite stupid around women, right? men lose their #e (beg pardon) around women we can't mix them together well in combat units.
Keep women units SEPARATE from men, then OK, that's fine. I could NEVER see women being drafted and sent to combat units, that's really what I would like to avoid.

How nice of you to make that decision for them.

Again woman is responsible for man's irresponsible behavior. Let's throw a burka on them - - so man won't be tempted.

Are you really paying attention to what you are saying?

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
The single thing I don't want to see women doing is killing people, even in war. Call me sexist IDC, I think women are too good for such violent roles.

But shouldn't that be THEIR choice? Why are you more qualified than they are to make that choice for them?

I explained why I don't think OPEN homosexuals should be in combat units.

And if soldiers just couldn't feel "cohesive" because there was a black soldier in their midst? Should we make black people wear white face so everyone could be happy? Because that's akin to Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Respectfully, I don't think you're thinking about the way gay people feel when in the military. It's all about how straight people feel.

This is simply my view of what would work best for the military. Now maybe if they had gay-only combat units............hmmm. They did have black only units, japanese/american units. HELL> WHY NOT? You just changed my mind for me mid-post.

Oh, well never mind!

Originally posted by jerico65
And I love how they want to make the decisions on who can join and who can't, and they aren't the ones that will have to deal with the problems that will arise from that decision.

Yeah, kind of like men deciding what women can and cannot do with their bodies instead of leaving it up to them. .

I'm not deciding who can and cannot be in the military. I say everyone should have the option. Everyone should have the same opportunity.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
I was always taught to be protective of women, is there something wrong with that idea?

Only if it gets in your way. Women are taught to be nurturing and somewhat subservient to men, but that won't work in combat, either. They need to put that aside and be strong enough and smart enough to stay focused on the task at hand. I don't ask any less of men.

Originally posted by whatukno
A dumb move on Clinton's part, but it was a step in the right direction...

Exactly. It was a step, just as "civil unions" are a step toward gay marriage. It's not ideal, but it moves us toward the goal.

The military will adjust to this. There are already gays in the military and many of them are "known" gay. They will survive and be stronger than ever.

Honestly, this is a stupid conversation.

Homosexual men, the only issue here as most men tend to get half-hard at gay women, are a pretty small percentage of the population.

The only problem would be a social problem, nothing more. The effectiveness of a man's body, determination, strength, agility, firearms capability, fighting ability, prowess in air combat, etc are not effected by where he puts his penis.

If military members have a problem with it, tell them what they are always told when they have to do or deal with something they don't like but is lawful. "Shut your pieholes and get it done."

It's beyond me why a volunteer military would turn away anyone that fits the physical and mental qualifications. Man, woman, gay, straight, it really makes no difference outside people's silly social dispositions.

Somehow former black gangmembers and former white racists can be partners and expected to work together. Many things divide us, but to cordon off only a few of them and say that those would be the ones that would break down the military's social framework is nonsense.

It does not matter, ultimately, how the members of the military feel. They will do what they are told or they will have issues.

[edit on 28-1-2010 by KrazyJethro]

Originally posted by MajesticJax

Originally posted by Sf18443
Fox news has just reported that Obama, in tonight's state of the union speech, will as congress to repeal the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy in the US military.

Look, I have extensive hetero credentials, but really, what's the big deal? Our military should be made up of the cross-section of our society, and homosexuals are a part of it. My problem lies when they want to force the exposure to homosexuality on our pre-pubescent chidren, (as in presenting that "lifestyle" in school, books, etc, to children 12 or so and under). THAT is wrong.

Other than that, I don't care who Sgt. Jones blows in his off-time, as long as he follows his orders while delivering on his promise to protect the tenets of the Constitution.

Bravo! Very well said! I agree with you 100% That is the way that it should be.