DOD holds 1st LGBT pride event in Kandahar, Afghanistan

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by beezzer

 

Originally posted by beezzer
Where skin colour is irrelevant,

Do you think there may have been a celebration or two when black people were first permitted to serve in the regular Army?

Probably. Was before even MY time.

Would you have criticized it?

I was taught that skin colour was irrelevant. I would have said, "Meh. Now lets get to work."

DOD Celebrates African American History Month

It's people celebrating our history as a country! Inclusion is something for us ALL to celebrate! Gay people aren't the only ones who celebrate Gay Pride, any more than blacks are the only ones who celebrate Black History or Christians are the only ones who celebrate Christmas. It's all part of our nation's history. Would you only have us celebrate white Christian history?

I'll concede that point. As long as EVERYONE is invited to such an event, then it would be inclusive.

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by beezzer

 

I dont think Gays in the Military are going to use "this day" as their day of Holiday. It was just a day that showed they didn't have to hide who they were anymore.

I am seriously hoping as a species we can get past this issue.

One day people will be able to look at my Gay Cousin in the Military and look at her as just another soldier doing her Job, not the "everyone knows shes gay" soldier, complete with the looks and mumblings under their breaths.

Unfortunately, it still happening.

What a day that will be! I hope there is ongoing 'education' so that homophobia ceases to exist. Sounds like the military are trying. We will see what happens after the next election.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by sonnny1

 

It is divisive. It separates. It isolates. It focuses on the differences instead of the commonalities.

Never mind that this is one of the first wars in which minorities weren't either shoved into a separate platoon which participate in suicide missions, or were at very least thrown into the frontlines of battle as well as every marching party's flank.

That's beside the point, right?

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by sonnny1

 

It is divisive. It separates. It isolates. It focuses on the differences instead of the commonalities.

Never mind that this is one of the first wars in which minorities weren't either shoved into a separate platoon which participate in suicide missions, or were at very least thrown into the frontlines of battle as well as every marching party's flank.

That's beside the point, right?

edit on 7-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

What's your point?

reply to post by Iamschist


Yes.


One day as a species, we will wake up. I still have faith.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by sonnny1

 

It is divisive. It separates. It isolates. It focuses on the differences instead of the commonalities.

Never mind that this is one of the first wars in which minorities weren't either shoved into a separate platoon which participate in suicide missions, or were at very least thrown into the frontlines of battle as well as every marching party's flank.

That's beside the point, right?

edit on 7-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

What's your point?

My point is that we shouldn't pretend everyone is equal in the Army. They aren't. And people are still fighting for their rights. The fact that we're fighting doesn't mean we should forget a civil rights struggle - the people organizing their platoons clearly don't forget who's a minority and who isn't.

Not to mention the fact that the only reason the wars we're in are even somewhat justifiable is because one tyrant was attacking minority groups (referring to the poisonous gas used on hundreds of thousands of Kurds) and another tyrant attacked us on our homeland for our person beliefs.

I thought it would have been obvious at this point that sticking to your guns on what you stand for plays a very large role in all of this.

reply to post by beezzer

Originally posted by beezzer
I'll concede that point. As long as EVERYONE is invited to such an event, then it would be inclusive.

I don't know of ANY LGBT event, parade, celebration, bar or party that was exclusive. I have never been asked if I was gay or been asked to to prove that I was gay to attend any such event. It's a good thing, too, because I'm not. Why would you even imply that these events are exclusive?

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


How inappropriate. They make our female military were head coverings and no alcohol can be sent to service men not even a cake with brandy and they then have a totally inappropriate celebration. "The Pentagon also held a LGBT" What the pentagon getting into Make Love Not war? Weird thing to do.

Originally posted by HairlessApe


My point is that we shouldn't pretend everyone is equal in the Army. They aren't. And people are still fighting for their rights. The fact that we're fighting doesn't mean we should forget that idea - the people organizing their platoons clearly keep it close-in-mind.

That is changing. To further point out the differences though, slows the process.

Not to mention the fact that the only reason the wars we're in are even somewhat justifiable is because one tyrant was attacking minority groups (referring to the poisonous gas used on hundreds of thousands of Kurds) and another tyrant attacked us on our homeland for our person beliefs.

Why we are fighting is for another thread.

I thought it would have been obvious at this point that sticking to your guns on what you stand for plays a very large role in all of this.

edit on 7-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

My position has never changed, even when it was unpopular with the military. I could give a damn back then, I could give a damn now. People are people. We should be judged by our character and our actions not phenotypical expressions.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Why would you even imply that these events are exclusive?

Because they are often tied to political events/political motivations that are exclusive.

Originally posted by neo96
That has ZERO PLACE IN A WAR ZONE.

The pandering has got to end.

Save the GD politics for the states.

Kind of makes our military and leaders look like a joke. Where is the professionalism.

Originally posted by Domo1
Perhaps this isn't actually about the Taliban and our involvement in Afghanistan, but about our troops who serve THE SAME as the rest that are finally allowed to be themselves without fear of reprisal.

If that makes our enemy think we're, weak who cares? If anything, that's good. I have a feeling a lot of tough guys spouting anti homosexual nonsense on this site would get the crap beat our of them by most gay guys/lesbians.

Should we just remove all the women serving so the Taliban doesn't think we're soft? It's hysterical to me that gays and women are helping to kick the crap out of 'em. It reminds me of Hitler's boxer getting squashed by a black guy.

People upset over homosexuals sound far more like candy asses to me than any mincing gay guy in uniform. Grow up.

So you think the pentagon now should hold parades for personal agendas and preferences in military zones?

This is the area where our base was attacked no long ago, my son was there, They were ordered not to respond! One of his friends an army woman had her teeth knocked out by a rock that came at them with many others while they protected their wall and still they could not respond.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by HairlessApe


My point is that we shouldn't pretend everyone is equal in the Army. They aren't. And people are still fighting for their rights. The fact that we're fighting doesn't mean we should forget that idea - the people organizing their platoons clearly keep it close-in-mind.

That is changing. To further point out the differences though, slows the process.

It's been "changing" for centuries. It's constantly in a "changing" state and every time we deem targeting one minority unacceptable to single out we find another scapegoat and start all over again. This time the bigot's excuse is "it's not about skin color." That is a daft and ignorant statement.

Refusing to look at the division that already exists only slows down change.

Not to mention the fact that the only reason the wars we're in are even somewhat justifiable is because one tyrant was attacking minority groups (referring to the poisonous gas used on hundreds of thousands of Kurds) and another tyrant attacked us on our homeland for our person beliefs.

Why we are fighting is for another thread.


It's not, I just think you don't want to recognize the fact that people being prideful of their personal beliefs, cultures, creeds, sexuality, skin color, and everything else which makes us diverse is a part of this war. One of the biggest examples of this in our current time is LGBT rights. You wouldn't ask Christians to not pray, nor would you ask female recruits to wear veils to appease the enemy. You wouldn't ask the troops not to celebrate. You wouldn't ask Irish troops to not identify, publicly, with their heritage. You wouldn't ask the troops to skip Christmas. Yet you (personally) WOULD ask a minority group under attack to not have a single day of celebration. And that is WRONG.

I thought it would have been obvious at this point that sticking to your guns on what you stand for plays a very large role in all of this.

edit on 7-7-2013 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)

My position has never changed, even when it was unpopular with the military. I could give a damn back then, I could give a damn now. People are people. We should be judged by our character and our actions not phenotypical expressions.

If you didn't give a damn, you wouldn't ask them to keep a low profile in the face of someone who hates them for who they are. From my perspective, it's clear that you do indeed give a damn.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Why would you even imply that these events are exclusive?

Because they are often tied to political events/political motivations that are exclusive.

Like what?

reply to post by Domo1

Well for the gay members in the military and the command, obviously yes, it is important.

How about addressing the massive problem of rape in the military instead.

what ever happened to taketh ye the religion of the land ?.

talk about sticking your nose in it good way to win over the hardline radicals over there .

somebody needs their ass kicked for this

Why would you want to celebrate being gay while in a war zone like Afghanistan?

Just do your job and come home safe. Has no place there, you are simply stirring the pot.

reply to post by Char-Lee


I 100% agree this needs to be addressed, along with any race issues as one poster mentioned. I disagree that it is either/or. Anyone who is mentally and physically fit to serve should be celebrated and respected. They fight and die for principles in the Bill of Rights.

reply to post by HairlessApe


Right. Now you're just being obtuse.

Look, I think it's a bad idea in a war zone, it sends mixed messages. There is political ideologies attached, if you can't see that then the fault lies with you.

I'll personally concede the point (as I have) and say do whatever. As long as the mission gets accomplished (whatever that mixed mission goal is) then fine.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by HairlessApe

 

Right. Now you're just being obtuse.

Look, I think it's a bad idea in a war zone, it sends mixed messages. There is political ideologies attached, if you can't see that then the fault lies with you.

I'll personally concede the point (as I have) and say do whatever. As long as the mission gets accomplished (whatever that mixed mission goal is) then fine.

I don't think I'm being obtuse at all. Could you please clarify? I thought all of my points were valid and deserving of answers.

Again - I'm asking you what those political ideologies are. (despite the fact that my 3 other points were not yet addressed) I don't know why the response has to be a passive-aggressive one-liner that attack my character rather than a straightforward answer.

I responded to all of your points, I don't think I'm expecting too much in asking for you to explain your opinion with some substance.