Officer won't sign order for troop pro-homosexual indoctrination

page: 50
21
<< 47  48  49    51 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Your right you can...Hitler did too, how did that work out?




posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by Annee
 


Your right you can...Hitler did too, how did that work out?


So annoying. I won't even respond to someone who throws Hitler or communism into the mix.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Of course not, because it shows the complete fallacy of your statement.

The first step in destroying all rights is removing rights from one for another. Your blind if you don't see that.

The only solutions that would work would be INCREASING rights for all, decreasing for none.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
I doubt any flamboyant gay will be joining the military.


There will be. As soon as DADT is completely removed, a very flamboyant gay individual will go to the nearest recruiter with the press in tow and enlist. Don't kid yourself that there aren't any with an agenda and a ax to grind against the military.

He'll go to basic, where he'll be given extra privledges that other recruits don't get, like keep up with his blog, etc. And he'll get a go for all his training cycles, because if it's even hinted at that he will fail, Social Actions will come down hard on his instructors.

He'll get to his unit untrained, where he'll be a drag on everyone else. And when he's finally booted out of the service, he'll either have a book deal or movie waiting for him.

People love to use the expression, "But other countries allow gays to openly serve". Big deal; since when is the US "other countries"? Let them do what they want, I don't care. But I do care about the US Military.

99% of the gays that want to serve will continue to do what they do now and not tell anyone their orientation. It's that 1% that will raise hell and make waves.

There should be no such thing as a "gay Soldier". There are only Soldiers; that's the primary mindset. Anything else just gets in the way.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


Hey there Golf. I'm Nanny to my 3 year old grandson who's dad died before he was a month old.

I'm telling you that only to let you know why my posts tend to be short quips. I will make every effort to take some "quiet time" to intelligently and thoughtfully respond to your post.

Annee
(I just like the little tongue guy)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by Annee
I doubt any flamboyant gay will be joining the military.


There will be. As soon as DADT is completely removed, a very flamboyant gay individual will go to the nearest recruiter with the press in tow and enlist. Don't kid yourself that there aren't any with an agenda and a ax to grind against the military.



As there are Macho Straights.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Court martial-
punishments for him

half months pay time 2 for each member of his command
-reduction down one level in rank for each trooper in his command
-30 days bread and water for each trooper in his command
-30 year breaking rocks in C and C with the marines after his brig time

charges-
disobeying a direct order
conduct unbecoming an officer
violating the general orders
civil rights violation for each member of his command
failure to train - for each member of his command
disobeying an order to communicate an order
disrespecting a superior officer
insubordination
mutiny
treason
aiding and abetting the enemy


to name a few to start with
edit on 13-1-2011 by ripcontrol because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by ripcontrol
 


LOL Ripcontrol

Now that was straight forward


Hope you were serious.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by peck420

You can't remove rights of one to placate another, in EITHER direction.


Well actually - - yes you can. Just from this one discussion - - - you can see how equality has to be Forced.



Wait...what? You're advocating reverse discrimination in the name of equality?? ANY form of discrimination is the opposite of equality, no matter who it's against.

Something tells me this issue hits very close to home for you...and that's okay, I'm sure it hits close to home for a lot of people....but equality can never be achieved through discrimination of any sort.

The rights of one group will never supersede the rights of another in an equal society. Any deviation from that means the society is not equal.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by FreeSafety
 


Its very clear you want this to be - - what you have deemed it is.

You are one of those who will keep posting and re-posting - - changing your wording until someone agrees with you.

Excuses are Excuses are Excuses.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


as former enlisted they are wasting time and money with worthless studies...

This is one of the times you do not need to do a study... We followed orders...

It is called professionalism... I have again and again found what I thought was the norm was me being lucky to an extant

Simple issue, sex is not discussed in workplace. Neither is gossip, and trust me you can brake em of the habit longest took about three days of cleaning with a toothbrush...


I am more confused over this stupidity, you do your job above and beyond and then I might approve...

What does sex have to do with it... You are not allowed to discuss if, how, who, when or where... otherwise it is sexual harassment....

Then only necessary thing is to send an email notifying so and so is gay and rfrain from physical enagement...

Its not that hard...
make a complete list of all interactions and ta da... back to work...

You see I was taught if you have time to complain over bs it means you do not have enough work and can do more... Like toilets, banisters, bulkheads, quarter, decks, trust me sports and tactics become a lot more interesting...

if you got to play it safe ... ask if everyone present is ok with X topic...

duh...

This officer would be made an example of for being stupid.... his type needs to be completely removed from the military... Not following an order is what is wrong here..

Plain and simple....
edit on 13-1-2011 by ripcontrol because: to err is human, if you filed out the proper forms
edit on 13-1-2011 by ripcontrol because: opps didnt fill out the write form in triplicate... brb
edit on 13-1-2011 by ripcontrol because: ok.. i think i got the last I d 10 t form for this officer



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by FreeSafety
 


Its very clear you want this to be - - what you have deemed it is.

You are one of those who will keep posting and re-posting - - changing your wording until someone agrees with you.

Excuses are Excuses are Excuses.



What are you talking about? What excuses?

What I want is equality for everyone, which can be attained by removing the labels. People are people, treat them all the same. In the military, people don't need to know each other's orientation. They just don't, there's no reason to know it, if equality truly is the goal. Remove the language that makes homosexuality an offense in the UCMJ, remove the process for discharging members based on their orientation. If one wants to be treated like everyone else, don't give someone else a reason to treat you differently. In other words; don't ask, don't tell is a fine policy to attain equality once the above mentioned regulations are changed. That's what I've been saying all along.

You, on the other hand, apparently want preferential treatment for homosexuals. Most of what you keep posting is putting homosexuals on a pedestal and portraying heterosexuals as undeserving, second class citizens. That's why I quoted your post and replied, so that you could point out what you meant if not that.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by FreeSafety
 


I am very familiar with your type of posting.

You come into a thread with a premise of understanding and wanting to learn or be open to different ideas.

But you really are not. Your main intent is to make your own position known.

You will continue to be tenacious in trying to make everyone agree with your viewpoint.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeSafety

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by FreeSafety
 


Its very clear you want this to be - - what you have deemed it is.

You are one of those who will keep posting and re-posting - - changing your wording until someone agrees with you.

Excuses are Excuses are Excuses.



What are you talking about? What excuses?

What I want is equality for everyone, which can be attained by removing the labels.

Ah yes, libertee, egalite ... Hagebuttentee (ahm, sorry bad German joke). Equality is great; but remember: all animals are created equal; it's just that some are more equal than others (George Orwell: Animal Farm).

Originally posted by FreeSafety
People are people, treat them all the same. In the military, people don't need to know each other's orientation. They just don't, there's no reason to know it, if equality truly is the goal. Remove the language that makes homosexuality an offense in the UCMJ, remove the process for discharging members based on their orientation. If one wants to be treated like everyone else, don't give someone else a reason to treat you differently. In other words; don't ask, don't tell is a fine policy to attain equality once the above mentioned regulations are changed. That's what I've been saying all along.

Well, no, I think ask many questions and tell all you want is far better - even for the military - but what do I know? I'm just a civilian (although I have proudly served my country for 19 months). They told me while I served that "where the military begins, logic and reason ends", meaning the military has it's own twisted logic that is usually not compatible with common sense.

Originally posted by FreeSafety
You, on the other hand, apparently want preferential treatment for homosexuals. Most of what you keep posting is putting homosexuals on a pedestal and portraying heterosexuals as undeserving, second class citizens. That's why I quoted your post and replied, so that you could point out what you meant if not that.

No, just leave them be. If they want to talk to their fellow soldiers about their sexual preference let them do so freely. Remember: liberte (liberty), egalite (equality), fraternite (fraternity or brotherhood - " ... a brotherhood of man ..."). See, if you are in the army and you are heterosexual and you hit on a member of the opposite sex, there's little to no problem. Happens all the time, at least, where I live. So, give homosexuals the same right ... Allow them to proudly serve their country ... instead of hiding in the closet of "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Just my 2Eurocents.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
reply to post by FreeSafety
 


I am very familiar with your type of posting.

You come into a thread with a premise of understanding and wanting to learn or be open to different ideas.

But you really are not. Your main intent is to make your own position known.

You will continue to be tenacious in trying to make everyone agree with your viewpoint.



I am open to new and different ideas. What I'm not open to are old and tired ideas that have proven to fail. In this case, continuing discrimination.

I posed a solution, one I feel is fair to everyone. If someone feels it's flawed, or they have a better one, I'm very open to reading it and discussing it. Discussion is why I come to this board, and as long as it's civil, intelligent and honest, I'm game.

Who have I tried to make agree with my viewpoint? I posted in response to your flawed logic regarding equality, which you're now apparently trying to avoid addressing by attempting to make this a discussion about me. That's off-topic anyway. Forget me, just defend your post. If you don't want preferential treatment for homosexuals in the military, please explain what you meant by saying you can remove the rights of one to placate another.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by FreeSafety
 


Interesting.

Your wording and phrasing - - - defies what you try to put forth.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by Annee
I doubt any flamboyant gay will be joining the military.


There will be. As soon as DADT is completely removed, a very flamboyant gay individual will go to the nearest recruiter with the press in tow and enlist. Don't kid yourself that there aren't any with an agenda and a ax to grind against the military.



As there are Macho Straights.


But there aren't any "macho straights" that will be screaming about their rights and being treated fairly. Sorry, life isn't fair, so why think the military is going to be fair?

No one seems to realise that being in the military isn't a right, it's a privilege.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by Annee

As there are Macho Straights.


But there aren't any "macho straights" that will be screaming about their rights and being treated fairly.


Oh OK - - - Macho Straights and Macho Gays won't be screaming about their rights.

Whimpy Straights and Whimpy Gays will be screaming about their rights.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by WalterRatlos

Originally posted by FreeSafety

Ah yes, libertee, egalite ... Hagebuttentee (ahm, sorry bad German joke). Equality is great; but remember: all animals are created equal; it's just that some are more equal than others (George Orwell: Animal Farm).


haha animal farm is one of my favorite books. Very fitting in this case, as well, since superiority for a few came about under the facade of wanting equality for all. Excellent point here.


Well, no, I think ask many questions and tell all you want is far better - even for the military - but what do I know? I'm just a civilian (although I have proudly served my country for 19 months). They told me while I served that "where the military begins, logic and reason ends", meaning the military has it's own twisted logic that is usually not compatible with common sense.


You couldn't be more right about the military and logic. Pure bureaucratic idiocy writes most of the regulations. Also, one doesn't have to be a soldier to have an opinion. Your's is as welcome as any and all others.


No, just leave them be. If they want to talk to their fellow soldiers about their sexual preference let them do so freely. Remember: liberte (liberty), egalite (equality), fraternite (fraternity or brotherhood - " ... a brotherhood of man ..."). See, if you are in the army and you are heterosexual and you hit on a member of the opposite sex, there's little to no problem. Happens all the time, at least, where I live. So, give homosexuals the same right ... Allow them to proudly serve their country ... instead of hiding in the closet of "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Just my 2Eurocents.


To clarify- I don't mean I think they need to hide "in the closet", just keep everyone's orientation out of official business. If someone wants to tell someone else in an unofficial capacity, go ahead, that's each one's personal business. My position is just don't let anyone ask or tell another their orientation as a matter of business, because it isn't a matter of business. I feel there's no room in the workplace to discuss sexual orientation, as it's irrelevant for any and all purposes other than discrimination.

You do have a point, opposite sex heterosexual military members do flirt with each other. That's going to happen, and I agree that gays shouldn't be denied that. It's supposed to be kept out of the work environment, and should remain so.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


and you again fail to stay on topic and address your position. I see a pattern starting to form...

I would ask you to elaborate, because I am interested, but I'm not going to contribute to the hijacking of this thread. Nice try.

So, I'll ask you for the third time. Please, stay on topic and explain what you meant when you posted that you can remove the rights of one to placate another in the name of equality.





new topics
top topics
 
21
<< 47  48  49    51 >>

log in

join