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

page: 9
21
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by marsoc
Thats a crock, gay guys have more fun in the showers then straight do, guarantee that, i worked wit someone we all new was gay but he never came out, and ya he would hav that wierd look and try to act like he wasnt check u out, made everyone uncomfortable and no one would go in the showers when he came in, and for females, they compare bodies they are naturally like that, guys dont give a #


you are not helping your cause
It's so funny seeing people come into this thread saying "I knew this ONE gay guy and he...." therefore all gays are like that.

Doesn't make any sense, you are treating gays like aliens
Oh I once saw this alien and he had a type A personality so everyone from his planet must be like that

But you know what's even funnier?
That even the people in this thread that are pro-gay also treat them like aliens
Straight men rape so gay men won't.




posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   
I think the women in this thread who are having a problem seeing why straight men have a problem with this, should campaign to have all military members, regardless of gender or sexuality, shower together.
That's fair and equal for everyone. Problem solved.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gseven

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by bluemirage5
Allowing soldiers to be openly gay in the military is damaging morale of the heterosexual men and women's strong religious beliefs.


When you voluntarily travel vast distances to kill people that are not a threat to your life, which religious values do you get to stand behind again?


That is your perception and your belief, based on your armchair knowledge of what really goes on.


Um....no...

That is a question. If the sentence itself is confusing, I included corresponding punctuation "?" in order to make clear that it was a question. I am not sure if there is some confusion over what a question is with your response to me or not but nothing you really said had to do with my question as it was not a response to me but just an attempt to use my post as an excuse to post whatever you wanted. You can post without hitting the reply buttong. Just go ahead and do it. If you respond to my question, I expect an answer. I am funny that way.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by marsoc
 


So you guys just assumed he was gay and made yourselves uncomfortable with that assumption? Let me guess....he 'looked' gay, right? My gosh!
edit on 28-12-2010 by Cablespider because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Military showers are the same showers offered to any other occupation. There is an individual section with a shower head and a curtain. If you can't find out how the curtain works... maybe we should include that in basic training rather than make huge latrine buildings to protect our brave heroes' bums from being peeked at.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Flighty, as I stated a while back, it isnt the same. Lesbians arent interested in straight males, are they? Why would gays be interested in straight males? Why would gay men be interested in lesbians?

They are not sexually compatible. your fears are unfounded and it ISNT the same as having straight men and straight women shower together.
edit on 28-12-2010 by Xavialune because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
But you know what's even funnier?
That even the people in this thread that are pro-gay also treat the


Nobody said that there would 100% be no rape perpetrated by a gay guy.

They said the argument sucks because the rape is primarily preformed by heterosexual men, who are already allowed in the military.... maybe they shouldn't be?

And I know you want to go on about the showers, but it really just doesn't make sense to just do it for the military when so many other occupations have the exact same showers that employees are expected to use... even our children shower in a huge open room that has 12 or so shower heads in it... it's just cheaper and reality has these things called budgets..
edit on 28-12-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Simply because someone is anti-war and wants to bring our troops home from the Middle East, does not mean these same people are necessarily anti-military, and that sure as hell doesn't mean they cannot support homosexuals openly serving in the military.

I'm against the wars. I'm anti-war in general. But I'm very open about my support for the military, and very open for my support for homosexuals serving openly in the military.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
I was going to write another post...but I deleted it.

Its okay for you to hate homosexuals, I just feel so sorry for you that you cannot allow another human being to express themselves how they choose to do so, especially if its based on consensual relationship.

Great shame to those who hold back the free flowing river that is human expression.

Honor to those who take up the banner and march forward in whatever way they choose. That is American.

Especially the rainbow warriors.

-G



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Yes - everyone looks.

If they deny it - they say they don't they are lying.


When I went through Marine Corps boot camp, we were lined up butt naked down the squad bay, facing each other, every day, several times a day, for the first several weeks. When we took showers, several times a day, we were forced to be crowded, 5 or 6 people under one shower head. Body parts touched, whether you liked it or not. There was an unwritten rule amongst everyone...."eyes UP"....period....and you did your damnedest to keep your body from invading someone's space. If someone brushed against you, you did your damnedest to ignore...probably was an accident. God forbid if it wasn't. If you insist that you would steal peeks in the same situation, I will laugh at you and wish you were young enough to join and try it....you'd find out how quickly you'd change your views. It wouldn't be tolerated, and having a squad by full of people who suspect you're going against a mutual code of respect is a very bad and scary thing. What I didn't know about the others around me was best left unsaid, and they felt the same way. If I had to do it all again with all the changes being made and people like you going in, I would never join again.

Please stop making blanket statements about things you know nothing about. Too bad you don't know Marines as intimately as you know gays, otherwise you wouldn't try trumpeting your absurd statements.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   
How many gay people in the military are going to act differently now? Do gay people get to wear purple camo, or get a rainbow pin? Do they get to skip instead of march? Are they going to be have gay ammended into their title, like gay captain so and so? Are they going to be like "Hey, I am private jones, and I am gay."?

Or will they keep their orientation to themselves, and stick to business at hand? I am guessing the latter.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
It is not just males serving in the military. And those who are gay are not just males.

So why are yall not talking about the straight women who have to serve along gay women? Please tell me the risks involved with gay women serving and living amongst straight women.

Again, I am a woman and have no issue with gay women around me - even if it is in a shower or living situation. Straight men are much more a threat, problem or whatever negative word you want to throw in there.

I am willing to change my stance on all of this if anyone can start giving reasons why gay men are a threat to straight men - anywhere.

Any women here in the military that can post their opinions?
edit on December 28th 2010 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flighty

I think the fear here is that SOME straight men may succumb to SOME gay men who also are a long way from their partners for very long extended periods of time, if the situation came up.



Really?

That is a thought that never occurred to me.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia
When you voluntarily travel vast distances to kill people that are not a threat to your life, which religious values do you get to stand behind again?


That is your perception and your belief, based on your armchair knowledge of what really goes on.


Um....no...

That is a question. If the sentence itself is confusing, I included corresponding punctuation "?" in order to make clear that it was a question. I am not sure if there is some confusion over what a question is with your response to me or not but nothing you really said had to do with my question as it was not a response to me but just an attempt to use my post as an excuse to post whatever you wanted. You can post without hitting the reply buttong. Just go ahead and do it. If you respond to my question, I expect an answer. I am funny that way.


Nope. You made a statement, preceded by the comma, then asked a question. There was no misunderstanding there. Your question was about religious values. My comment was directed at the statement made prior to the question.
edit on 28-12-2010 by Gseven because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-12-2010 by Gseven because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Gseven
 


My problem with this is that... if someone is gay and sneaking a peek, then that person should immediately be reported for sexual harassment, or whatever regulation it is that comes into play. A gay person, a straight person, if either of these people breaks any sort of law or regulation, then they should be reported. Simply because a homosexual is in the military and serving openly as a gay person, that doesn't mean they are exempt from proper law and military protocol.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Gseven
 


Do you think it's any less uncomfortable for the gay man? What makes you think he won't keep his 'eyes up' and be as respectful?
edit on 28-12-2010 by Cablespider because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


Well it is the military, females can be just as much of a threat if they have some psychopathic, antihomosexual urges. A female has a gun and is trained to use it too. Although I am sure that females are less worried about a gay woman with them, because they are used to different kind of bonding to begin with. Females interact and bond with each other way differently than males do.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


It's hypocritical, in a sense. Men like lesbians. They like the idea of women showering and soaping up together. But when the idea comes to light that gay men are going to be bathing with these straight men, it then becomes a matter of serious and grave importance. For these people who cannot tolerate homosexuality, men showering together is not sexy.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Perhaps his religion will also tell him women should be subservient and thus because of his religion he can't take orders from women.

Those who cannot adapt will leave instead of reinlisting. Many probably did the same when African Americans were integrated. The service will be better off without them.

Honestly I have to laugh at all the hoopla over this subject. Gays in the military are subject to the same dress codes and behavior standards as any other soldier/sailor, so I am not sure what the big deal is.

I will also add this. I have served (USN) and there were plenty of guys who were Gay. Nobody cared.



posted on Dec, 28 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gseven
Nope. You made a statement, preceded by the comma, then asked a question. There was no misunderstanding there.


No, the whole thing was one question. That is how English works. You do not get to make up new rules in order to make some lame argument. I see plenty of dead Iraquis. Now if you can explain to me how any of them were threat to the men that killed them, BEFORE THEY INVADED THEIR COUNTRY TO MURDER THEM, then go for it. You will fail. Since you seem to not understand how questions work, I have little hope.


Your question was about religious values. My comment was directed at the statement made prior to the question.
edit on 28-12-2010 by Gseven because: (no reason given)


You really should get a grammar book and a clue about who is being murdered. Anyone being killed by an insurgent with an IED could have easily avoided that by staying in the US. Instead they went over there, with the intention of killing people, that posed NO THREAT TO THEM AS INDIVIDUALS IN ANY WAY.

You cannot argue otherwise and you cannot make up new rules about how sentences work. I asked a question. If you cannot address it as it is, what you are doing is taking part of a sentence out of context and addressing that - which is highly dishonest and usually a tactic of the ignorant and lazy with no argument to make. I am sure you are better than that.





new topics
top topics
 
21
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join