Repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' passes Senate Committee

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 27 2010 @ 06:36 PM
link   
news.blogs.cnn.com...


A Senate committee Thursday passed a measure that would repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy barring openly gay and lesbian soldiers from military service, but only after a military review of the matter and subsequent approval by President Barack Obama, the defense secretary and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.


What the hell is up with America and ignoring our constitution? It clearly states equality before the law and that the government should not favor or discriminate. Yet that is what we have been doing ever since our founding fathers have passed. EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW.

P.S. Thomas Jefferson, while Governor of Virginia in the 1780's, attempted to pass a bill banning the death penalty for everything except treason and murder. He failed by just 1 vote. They did not ban it until the 1960's. This means Jefferson was nearly 200 years ahead of his time.




posted on May, 27 2010 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Sorry misor....i was under the impression you were british....

I just wonder how badly it will effect the military and those in it.

Dont blame us 'god-fearing,bible thumping' conservatives when those in service raise some hell or some adverse effects are found.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir

What the hell is up with America and ignoring our constitution? It clearly states equality before the law and that the government should not favor or discriminate. Yet that is what we have been doing ever since our founding fathers have passed. EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW.

P.S. Thomas Jefferson, while Governor of Virginia in the 1780's, attempted to pass a bill banning the death penalty for everything except treason and murder. He failed by just 1 vote. They did not ban it until the 1960's. This means Jefferson was nearly 200 years ahead of his time.


So let's let openly flaming homosexual gays into the military for equality's sake. What's next? The morbidly obese? What about their struggle for equality???

As far as the death penalty thing.....you pretty much have to commit murder in the first degree to qualify for the death penalty in the first place....yep that Jefferson was pretty much 200 years ahead of his time.


[edit on 27-5-2010 by Carseller4]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Carseller4
 


Actually until 1960 you could be put to death for rape, murder, treason, and I believe torture too.

So it wasn't just murder. That Jefferson SURE WAS 200 years before his time.


Before the 20th century, along with murder and rape, a variety of offenses could merit a death sentence — arson, burglary, horse rustling, robbery.

Under Virginia's Criminal Code, the following offenses carry the possibility of death:

Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder in the commission of abduction,
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder during a robbery or attempted robbery
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder by a person engaged in a continuing Criminal Drug Enterprise
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder in the commission of rape or attempted rape or sodomy, or attempted sodomy, or object sexual penetration
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder of a person under the age of 14 by a person over the age of 21
Contract killing
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder of a law enforcement officer
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder of more than one person (within a three year time frame)
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder of a pregnant woman
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder by an inmate while in a correctional facility.
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder committed during an act of terrorism.
Willful, deliberate and premeditated murder of a judge, juror, or witness


I guess murder is an umbrella term correct?


en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 5/27/10 by Misoir]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by tauempire
Sorry misor....i was under the impression you were british....

I just wonder how badly it will effect the military and those in it.

Dont blame us 'god-fearing,bible thumping' conservatives when those in service raise some hell or some adverse effects are found.


And if they do -Snip- them! Equality under the law, either you uphold the constitution or you light it on fire and stomp on it. PERIOD.

If they don't want to be with gays, guess what!? TOO BAD! Take your homophobic ass and move to Alabama.

Mod Edit - Please Do Circumvent The Automatic Censors.

[edit on Thu, 27 May 2010 21:23:36 -0500 by MemoryShock]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Yes!!!! Anyone who opposes it is uncivilized and intolerant to a whole new level. There is NO reason for homosexuals not to be in the military. There is no reason to discriminate against your fellow man.

This is history. This is great history.

Thank you. I once again have Some faith in America.

[edit on 27-5-2010 by GorehoundLarry]



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
It's about time this happened. Will it cause problems? Sure, but it happened when women and blacks were in before our society had gotten it's head out completely.

Being homosexual has no specific bearing on ability or intelligence. Those are the only 2 things that should be tested.

Personally I'd like to see us go the full length and have women have to sign up for Selective Service and have job restrictions lifted.

If you really want to be utilitarian, which the military should be, treat men and women the same in every respect. Showers, bunking, uniforms, physical standards, etc.

Equality is equality. There really isn't much wiggle room.

Peace
KJ



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:29 PM
link   
What about the morbidly obese? Surely they should be able to serve our great country. It's not their fault you know, some say it is genetic.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Carseller4
 


It's a non sequitur and you know it.

Why continue to use poorly formed logic when you'd tear someone up one side and down the other for giving it's equal to you?



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
What about the morbidly obese? Surely they should be able to serve our great country. It's not their fault you know, some say it is genetic.


What an invalid argument. Absolutely horrendous one I may add. But I'll take the bait and feed your trolling:

An obese person may be a bit unfit (no pun intended?) to join the military. Although it could whip them into shape!

If they want to serve, they should. Their passion is what counts the most.

As for gays, they're just like any other human being. There is nothing different once so ever except for the sexual orientation. What? Does that make someone less of a man?

If you truly believe that...then, well, I feel sorry for you.

Thanks.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 08:59 PM
link   
I actually see both sides of this argument. If a straight woman does not want to shower with a heterosexual man, there is no problem. When a straight man does not want to shower with a gay man, he is suddenly a bigot. Of course showering is one of many examples.

I can see how having openly gay people in the military would be problematic for unit cohesion. Like it or not there are quite a few homophobes out there.

On the other hand, I think that gay people deserve the same rights and opportunities as everyone else. What about an all gay barracks? Well, that would probably make the majority of homosexuals uncomfortable as well.

This is a difficult problem and requires more than a knee jerk reaction.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raustin
I actually see both sides of this argument. If a straight woman does not want to shower with a heterosexual man, there is no problem. When a straight man does not want to shower with a gay man, he is suddenly a bigot. Of course showering is one of many examples.


This is , one of, the reason I support gender neutrality in the military. Starship Troopers style, if you will.

This seems to be the most equitable and utilitarian, especially in the navy or in a war zone where space is limited or built for effectiveness rather than comfort or privacy.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Wow, we have a potentially earth changing catastophe occuring in the gulf, tension between north and south Korea, $13 trillion debt, open borders, illegals problems screwed up race relations.......and this is what we're supposed to be concerned about? Ah well, guess anything to keep you're promise to those that helped get you elected. Epic Fail.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
Wow, we have a potentially earth changing catastophe occuring in the gulf, tension between north and south Korea, $13 trillion debt, open borders, illegals problems screwed up race relations.......and this is what we're supposed to be concerned about? Ah well, guess anything to keep you're promise to those that helped get you elected. Epic Fail.


I know right?

Why not wait until a better time, like when robot unicorns fly down to give gumdrops to all the boys and girls of the world. Israel and Islam will kiss and make up while Obama reads the Constitution. Good times...

Jesus man, there's never been a good time to do much of anything and probably never will.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by KrazyJethro
 


Funny you mention Starship Troopers, that's what went through my mind as well. I think that is actually the answer. Probably won't happen for a good 50 years, but makes the most sense.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by adifferentbreed
 


Cry moar. If you have nothing to add to the topic, stay out. I find it interesting, and I'm sure others do as well.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Raustin
 


It was an intersting topic many times over....anyone who disagrees is a homophobe and a bigot. How many times does it need to be rehashed? As far as leaving.......or not contributing.......hmmmm, I thought I asked a valid question, with so much else more important going on in the world, why is this even important at this time?



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by adifferentbreed
 


Who gets to decide what the most interesting/important topic is? This may be more interesting for a homosexual trying to serve in the military than the gulf oil spill. Who are you to decide what the rest of us discuss?



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Raustin
 


I could ask you the same question. Funny, I generally agree with you on the boards here....interesting side you're showing.



posted on May, 27 2010 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
Wow, we have a potentially earth changing catastophe occuring in the gulf, tension between north and south Korea, $13 trillion debt, open borders, illegals problems screwed up race relations.......and this is what we're supposed to be concerned about? Ah well, guess anything to keep you're promise to those that helped get you elected. Epic Fail.


Considering it's as important as racial discrimination, yes, this is what we should be concerned about. Thanks.





new topics
top topics
 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join