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.
Originally posted by butcherguy
Why should a hetero man or woman in the military be forced to put up with showering with someone that is
sexually attracted to them, when it is not asked of civilians in a public setting?
Originally posted by Major Discrepancy
What's this recruit? The head rat, excuse the Major, the Senate Majority leader voted against it? Shouldn't that be the headline? It would be if the recruit didn't have an agenda. To their credit, the Republicans were voting on conviction; Lincoln, Pryor and Reid were voting to save their miserable necks in the upcoming election.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., also voted against the measure as a procedural tactic. Under Senate rules, casting his vote with the majority of the Senate enables him to revive the bill at a later date.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) voted "no" in a tactic that leaves him the option to revive the bill later.
A note on Senate procedure:
Senator Reid supports repealing "Don't Ask Don't Tell." Today he switched his vote to "no" at the end of the vote simply because Senate rules allow him to bring the bill back to the floor by doing so. Senator Reid will urge the Senate to reconsider DADT, but in order to do so, Senate procedure required him to change his vote.
I said nothing comparing gay to hetero promiscuity!
But again, i don't know where this view comes from that being gay means you're more promiscuous than a straight individual - and that is the sentiment i pick up from the anti-gay-in-the-military perspective.
Originally posted by Major Discrepancy
To their credit, the Republicans were voting on conviction; Lincoln, Pryor and Reid were voting to save their miserable necks in the upcoming election.
I have been in the US Navy, and I have showered with homosexual males. I have been approached by them, not in the showers, but during my time on one ship.
It is naive to assume that they are not already showering with folks who have a different sexual orientation. Those men and women are legally required not to make their fellow soldiers aware of the same.
Assuming one gender or sexual orientation is a greater threat than another makes no sense. Military code covers any situation concerning harrasment or unwanted advances...straight, gay, man, woman, whatever.
Originally posted by KerbDune
reply to post by pryingopen3rdeye
Your argument is based on a faulty assumption -- no, it won't be "ask and tell". The military won't ask anyone about their sexual preferences. Repealing DADT means that people who have admitted being gay, or admit while in active duty, won't be rejected or kicked out of the military for it.
You can list those sexual preferences and fetishes all you want but it's completely irrelevant if you or me find them repugnant -- it's none of our business and it absolutely has nothing to do with the ability to serve in the military.
I'm sure many of the people you deal with daily have fetishes. Should what they do in private alone disqualify them from their jobs? Or mean they are less capable of performing them?
Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Originally posted by pryingopen3rdeye
if DADT is repealed then we also must realise our military service members WILL at some point be actively discussing any one of the sexual preferences/fetishes listed below, and many more then that too.
Sorry...you miss the point entirely. Your whole post is based on the premise that homosexuality is a fetish. I think you should educate yourself a little better...mind you, I'm going to assume that you learned a little something about fetishism in preparing your post.
In addition, DODT is not about telling stories of 'sexual escapades' (which is simply a matter of manners), it's about not having to live a lie.
Originally posted by pryingopen3rdeye
the arguement of repealing DADT is under the facade of people not being kicked out for being gay, but that is not going to be affected, only wether they can talk about it will be effected, if they choose to kick someone out for being gay their gonna do it no matter the DADT policy, they just may do it under a different excuse.
Originally posted by butcherguy
Why not have just ONE shower, ONE restroom and ONE type of barracks???
edit on 22-9-2010 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)
What else can I say? You envision certain scenarios in the shower with a Gay solidiers...that I think belongs in the realm of paranoia or fantasy? The Canadian, British and ISraeli military have had no reported issue's in showers. restrooms or barracks with thier gay soldiers.
Originally posted by butcherguy
Why do women have separate facilities.
Starship Troopers where they had common showers? This Vet thinks that is a good idea.