Total Posts:185|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Don't ask, Don't tell?

comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 11:45:46 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
It makes no sense to get rid of this policy.
It is a good policy and can not see a problem with it.

I know we have discussed this before but everyone grows and views change. It is something that maybe on Obama's agenda, so it is prevalent to reintroduce it.

I do not understand why someone would want to get rid of a good policy.
So explain.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 11:48:51 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 11:45:46 AM, comoncents wrote:
It makes no sense to get rid of this policy.
It is a good policy and can not see a problem with it.


I know we have discussed this before but everyone grows and views change. It is something that maybe on Obama's agenda, so it is prevalent to reintroduce it.

I do not understand why someone would want to get rid of a good policy.
So explain.

How in the world is it a good policy?!!?!? Please explain exactly why you think it's a good policy.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 11:53:28 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
It protects people in the military.
People that can not see that do not understand the policy.

It is a policy that protects everyone from being asked if they are gay, heterosexual, and stops commanding officers from even getting around that question. Even in joking.

It is a great policy.
How is it not.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 11:58:20 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 11:53:41 AM, comoncents wrote:
At 4/24/2010 11:53:06 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
I'm going to have to say that this is a bad policy.

How?

It does not need to be repealed, just revamped along side of the US code of conduct.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:03:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Canada has had an open military - policies introduced by Conservatives - since the 1990's, and we've never had a problem. Any idea that the DADT law "protects" homosexuals in the military is flawed when presented with evidence everywhere else that it doesn't.

I can that after years of this law, stigmatizing the idea of homosexuals in the military even more, there might be an issue, but keeping it just lets the problem get worse. If a homosexual man or woman wants to join the military and protect their country, why stomp on their identity, kick them out and charge them when they decide to be open about who they are? Why continue a culture of deceit in the military? I thought it was all about trust and honour - and neither of those can flourish with this law in place.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:15:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:03:20 PM, Volkov wrote:
Canada has had an open military - policies introduced by Conservatives - since the 1990's, and we've never had a problem. Any idea that the DADT law "protects" homosexuals in the military is flawed when presented with evidence everywhere else that it doesn't.


Alowing to ask and tell is the wrong transition into an openly gay military.
First, revamp DADT. Change the US- Code of Conduct. And lets go from there.

keeping it just lets the problem get worse.

Keeping it will help the problem. It just needs to be revamped in wording to specify its protection of everyone. (the military treats it with an equal hand)
THan the CoC has to be changed, not allowing anyone to post pictures of any thing unbecoming of a soldier. Straight or Gay.
We start there.

If a homosexual man or woman wants to join the military and protect their country, why stomp on their identity,

Nothing is stopping them now b/c of DADT.

kick them out and charge them when they decide to be open about who they are?

No punish them for posting picture or them kissing the same sex.
Just as someone should be punished for kissing the opposite sex.
Or punish them (anyone) for acting inappropriately in public.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:22:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:15:47 PM, comoncents wrote:
Alowing to ask and tell is the wrong transition into an openly gay military.
First, revamp DADT. Change the US- Code of Conduct. And lets go from there.

What would be the difference, though? Why should homosexuals continue to suffer while military bureaucrats drag their heels in the name of "transition," when there is no evidence that repealing it will do any harm?

THan the CoC has to be changed, not allowing anyone to post pictures of any thing unbecoming of a soldier. Straight or Gay.

What does that mean? That's subjective and vague, and can easily be misconstrued to mean bikini pictures are out. The military is all about discipline, and I get that, but having too much discipline will just backfire.

Nothing is stopping them now b/c of DADT.

Yes it does - it stops them from being open and true to themselves, true to their fellow soldiers and offices, and feeling honoured and respected for who and what they are by both the American public and the military.

No punish them for posting picture or them kissing the same sex.
Just as someone should be punished for kissing the opposite sex.
Or punish them (anyone) for acting inappropriately in public.

So, instead of being fair and letting soldiers do their thing when not on duty, we have to stomp out everything? That doesn't help anything. You're exacerbating the problem by spreading DADT to straight couples, which doesn't help anything. It makes the problem worse. You're stopping everyone from doing things normal to humans, instead of saying, we'll be fair and let every soldier do this.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:26:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:15:47 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 4/24/2010 12:03:20 PM, Volkov wrote:
Canada has had an open military - policies introduced by Conservatives - since the 1990's, and we've never had a problem. Any idea that the DADT law "protects" homosexuals in the military is flawed when presented with evidence everywhere else that it doesn't.


Alowing to ask and tell is the wrong transition into an openly gay military.
First, revamp DADT. Change the US- Code of Conduct. And lets go from there.


What??? There are gay people in the military, Comon. Most of the military doesn't give a flying F about gay people in the military. If someone commits a hate crime - YOU CRACK DOWN. Wouldn't you crack down on military members hazing blacks or hispanics? Do you think that it should be "don't ask don't tell" for blacks? Hey, you're black! Don't tell people your black so they wont hurt you!

No. What you say is, if you F'ing touch a soldier because he is gay (black, hispanic, bi-racial, a hair dresser, whatever), that is a hate crime - you go to jail. Period. The same thing happened for blacks.

keeping it just lets the problem get worse.

Keeping it will help the problem. It just needs to be revamped in wording to specify its protection of everyone. (the military treats it with an equal hand)
THan the CoC has to be changed, not allowing anyone to post pictures of any thing unbecoming of a soldier. Straight or Gay.
We start there.


This is not just about pictures, Comon. These soldiers are not allowed to be in relationships because if the military finds out - they are kicked out with a dishonorable discharge. You being a soldier, you should know how horrible a dishonorable is.


If a homosexual man or woman wants to join the military and protect their country, why stomp on their identity,

Nothing is stopping them now b/c of DADT.


Nothing is stopping them from joining, but everything is stopping them from being who they are. This is a very Joan of Arc situation.

kick them out and charge them when they decide to be open about who they are?

No punish them for posting picture or them kissing the same sex.
Just as someone should be punished for kissing the opposite sex.
Or punish them (anyone) for acting inappropriately in public.

WHAT? Are you seriously suggesting that people should be kicked out for having pictures of kissing someone? That is the prude-est, stupidest thing I have ever heard in my life. They aren't just kicked out for kissing, Comon. If someone is suspected of having a homosexual relationship, they are kicked out. So, to be equal, if a straight person has a relationship they should be kicked out of the military? Straight soldiers have the ability to get married and take their spouses with them to bases. Gay soldiers are not allowed this privilege. Why is it ok for a straight soldier to kiss someone, have a relationship with someone, but it is not ok for a gay soldier to do the same thing?

How is it "unsoldier-like" to kiss someone? These soldiers are risking their LIVES for our country, and they can't even post a picture of the kissing someone or be in a relationship that makes them happy (like straight soldiers are already allowed to do).
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:26:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 11:53:28 AM, comoncents wrote:
It protects people in the military.

WRONG. The DADT policy implies that there is something wrong about being an open homosexual, therefore it doesn't protect people. It inhibits, oppresses and punishes people if somehow they are found out to be gay.

It is a policy that protects everyone from being asked if they are gay, heterosexual, and stops commanding officers from even getting around that question. Even in joking.

Not true. If someone accuses another of being gay, then of course they are asked if they are gay -- and then put on TRIAL -- and finally asked to leave, if people assume (or prove) that they are gay.

It is a great policy.

It's a f-cking disgusting policy.
President of DDO
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:28:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I think the DADT policy is ridiculous! I'm actually excited over the fact that Obama may get rid of it completely. I think it is completely stupid at the present time and should be completely abandoned. Clinton started this to protect homosexuals in the military, but I believe it has done more harm than good. There is no logical reasoning that comoncents can offer that supports this out-dated and ignorant policy. Why does it matter if you're openly gay in the military? Soldiers are more focused on avoiding death and killing enemies than worrying if their partner is going to stare at them or something. Btw, many homosexuals aren't even attracted to guys in the military. All that's important is the fact that a soldier has anyone to protect his back. Plain and simple. DADT is moronic and idiotic. It only remains because of the ignorance of Americans.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:29:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:26:19 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 4/24/2010 11:53:28 AM, comoncents wrote:
It protects people in the military.

WRONG. The DADT policy implies that there is something wrong about being an open homosexual, therefore it doesn't protect people. It inhibits, oppresses and punishes people if somehow they are found out to be gay.

It is a policy that protects everyone from being asked if they are gay, heterosexual, and stops commanding officers from even getting around that question. Even in joking.

Not true. If someone accuses another of being gay, then of course they are asked if they are gay -- and then put on TRIAL -- and finally asked to leave, if people assume (or prove) that they are gay.

It is a great policy.

It's a f-cking disgusting policy.

I COMPLETELY AGREE!!!
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:33:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:22:34 PM, Volkov wrote:
too much discipline will just backfire.

I don't think it would be considered "to much"

Nothing is stopping them now b/c of DADT.

Yes it does - it stops them from being open and true to themselves, true to their fellow soldiers and offices, and feeling honoured and respected for who and what they are by both the American public and the military.


There is no need for them to be open.
It is the military. No need for anyone to be open about sexuality.


So, instead of being fair and letting soldiers do their thing when not on duty, we have to stomp out everything? That doesn't help anything.

They do it already.
You can not post certain pics online now.
You can not do many things on your time off.

You're exacerbating the problem by spreading DADT to straight couples, which doesn't help anything.

It already is spread to straight couples.
It is just spotty on wording under the actual DADT policy.

It makes the problem worse. You're stopping everyone from doing things normal to humans, instead of saying, we'll be fair and let every soldier do this.

What?
Soldiers are not considered "normal humans" in your context.
We are forced to do things that are not natural all of the time.

Shot someone in the head. Is that natural? Or blow people up. Is that natural? Run 12 miles. Is that natural? Do 50 push ups in 2 min. Is that natural? Carry 100 pounds 15 miles. Is that natural?
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:35:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:33:22 PM, comoncents wrote:

There is no need for them to be open.
It is the military. No need for anyone to be open about sexuality.

So if you want to show someone a picture of your wife, that's fine. But if a man wants to show a picture of his boyfriend, he deserves to be kicked out and have his life/record ruined forever with a dishonorable discharge. Riiight. That's amazing logic. You sure are a fair person!
President of DDO
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:36:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:35:40 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 4/24/2010 12:33:22 PM, comoncents wrote:

There is no need for them to be open.
It is the military. No need for anyone to be open about sexuality.

So if you want to show someone a picture of your wife, that's fine. But if a man wants to show a picture of his boyfriend, he deserves to be kicked out and have his life/record ruined forever with a dishonorable discharge. Riiight. That's amazing logic. You sure are a fair person!

I WAS JUST ABOUT TO TYPE SOMETHING ABOUT THAT!!!

This comes back to a simple question: How does sexual orientation determine how someone can fire a gun, drive a tank, fabricate strategy, etc.?
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:48:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:33:22 PM, comoncents wrote:
I don't think it would be considered "to much"

Telling soldiers that they can't even show their affection toward their partners in public, whether homosexual or heterosexual? You don't think that's too harsh?

There is no need for them to be open.
It is the military. No need for anyone to be open about sexuality.

Why not? The military is a community filled with individuals who have lives they need to live. Sexuality and relationships are inherently apart of those lives. Are you going to say that soldiers can't have children, since that implies someone did the dirty at some point?

They do it already.
You can not post certain pics online now.
You can not do many things on your time off.

Then that's retarded, and it's even more retarded that the military kicks out homosexuals on the basis that they even say they're gay. Are you going to kick out heterosexuals if they say they're straight?

It already is spread to straight couples.
It is just spotty on wording under the actual DADT policy.

Then the US military will watch its numbers drop, like it should, for such stupid, stupid policies.

It makes the problem worse. You're stopping everyone from doing things normal to humans, instead of saying, we'll be fair and let every soldier do this.

What?
Soldiers are not considered "normal humans" in your context.
We are forced to do things that are not natural all of the time.

Shot someone in the head. Is that natural? Or blow people up. Is that natural? Run 12 miles. Is that natural? Do 50 push ups in 2 min. Is that natural? Carry 100 pounds 15 miles. Is that natural?

Yeah, that's all natural - you can do it, can't you? That's the definition of natural.

But you're saying soldiers can't have relationships at all? Can't have kids? Can't love someone else? What kind of military is this?
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 12:56:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:26:03 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:

What??? There are gay people in the military, Comon.

I know.

Most of the military doesn't give a flying F about gay people in the military.

That is false.
Non the less pointless.

If someone commits a hate crime - YOU CRACK DOWN. Wouldn't you crack down on military members hazing blacks or hispanics? Do you think that it should be "don't ask don't tell" for blacks? Hey, you're black! Don't tell people your black so they wont hurt you!

That is not what the policy is about.
But going with your concept...
If DADT did go to blacks than it would punish someone for hazing black people for being black.
And it should apply to the opposite of black as well. Whites.
It protect everyone and stops people from walking up to people and asking if they are black.
An action that should never take place anyway.


No. What you say is, if you F'ing touch a soldier because he is gay (black, hispanic, bi-racial, a hair dresser, whatever), that is a hate crime - you go to jail. Period. The same thing happened for blacks.


What?
I did not say that.

Side note-
Jail is not the only form of punishment in the military.
It is not even in the top 5 things that get done to soldiers.




This is not just about pictures, Comon.

I was using a common example.

These soldiers are not allowed to be in relationships because if the military finds out - they are kicked out with a dishonorable discharge.

Why would commander find out?
If it is DADT, they will never find out.

If they get a picture of you kissing a girl should you be kicked out... no.
If they get a picture of you kissing a man should you be kicked out... no.

And in my unit the person was never kicked out.

DADT just stops people from talking about it. Something that should not be talked about in the military anyway.

You being a soldier, you should know how horrible a dishonorable is.


They do not get a dishonorable any more.

Nothing is stopping them from joining, but everything is stopping them from being who they are.

No it is not. They will be "who they are" no matter what.
It just stops them from going around bragging about it. A good thing.



WHAT? Are you seriously suggesting that people should be kicked out for having pictures of kissing someone?

Punished not kicked out. They should not be posting pictures of anyone kissing anyone you are not married to in the military. It is a part of the policy now. It happens all of the time. Soldiers are called in to the commanders office and told to take down the pictures they have on their myspace b/c it is unbecoming of a soldier.

(mostly in uniform or pictures found mixed in with them wearing a uniform in other pictures, that is what I am talking about)

That is the prude-est, stupidest thing I have ever heard in my life.

Can't be.

They aren't just kicked out for kissing, Comon.

Not talking about getting kicked out.

If someone is suspected of having a homosexual relationship, they are kicked out.

Not in my unite. That is an incorrect assumption that gay activist for DADT like to boast.

So, to be equal, if a straight person has a relationship they should be kicked out of the military?

We had gay people that had relationships in our unite. They were called "room mates". So are straight people that have a relationship and live together.

Straight soldiers have the ability to get married and take their spouses with them to bases. Gay soldiers are not allowed this privilege.

Because gay people are not allowed to get married at a federal level.
Your marriage has to be recognized at a federal level before the military will allow anyone to "bring their spouses with them to bases"

Why is it ok for a straight soldier to kiss someone, have a relationship with someone, but it is not ok for a gay soldier to do the same thing?


Gay soldiers can. Just not in the viewing eye of leadership. Just like straight people can
Straight will be chewed out if they are caught kissing anyone (not married too them) in public.

How is it "unsoldier-like" to kiss someone?

Because it is a now rule held among bases.

These soldiers are risking their LIVES for our country, and they can't even post a picture of the kissing someone or be in a relationship that makes them happy (like straight soldiers are already allowed to do).

I think you have it.
They can not get caught.

It is the army. A dictatorship. These things may seem hard to believe but really they are not.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:00:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:26:19 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 4/24/2010 11:53:28 AM, comoncents wrote:
It protects people in the military.

WRONG. The DADT policy implies that there is something wrong about being an open homosexual, therefore it doesn't protect people. It inhibits, oppresses and punishes people if somehow they are found out to be gay.


I worked in the Fort Drum Judge Advocate and Support Troops Battalion front office.
You are wrong.


Not true. If someone accuses another of being gay, then of course they are asked if they are gay -- and then put on TRIAL -- and finally asked to leave, if people assume (or prove) that they are gay.


Nope, does not happen.
Someone accuses a person of being gay, then the commander looks at them and says, DADT.
I have seen it time after time.

It is a great policy.

It's a f-cking disgusting policy.

I guess everyone has their opinion.
Some think that communism is awesome. Opinion, just not mine.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:03:01 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:35:40 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 4/24/2010 12:33:22 PM, comoncents wrote:

There is no need for them to be open.
It is the military. No need for anyone to be open about sexuality.

So if you want to show someone a picture of your wife, that's fine.

Marriage is recognized, yes.

But if a man wants to show a picture of his boyfriend, he deserves to be kicked out

No. And that is not what happens.

and have his life/record ruined forever with a dishonorable discharge.

They do not get a dishonorable discharge

Riiight. That's amazing logic. You sure are a fair person!

Thanks.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:11:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:48:32 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 4/24/2010 12:33:22 PM, comoncents wrote:
I don't think it would be considered "to much"

Telling soldiers that they can't even show their affection toward their partners in public, whether homosexual or heterosexual? You don't think that's too harsh?


It happens today.
No PDA is allowed in the united states military under uniform.
In public it is fine. Just like it was fine for the gay people in my unit to do it outside of the unit.


Why not? The military is a community filled with individuals who have lives they need to live.

You are confused about what the military is about.
It is not a community first.
And it is only a community for married people.

Sexuality and relationships are inherently apart of those lives.

Not in a military lifestyle.

Are you going to say that soldiers can't have children, since that implies someone did the dirty at some point?


They can have children. If you get a person preg out of wedlock, you can be subject to punishment (usually does not happen). They will not be covered under tri-care.


Then that's retarded


Some would say that.


Then the US military will watch its numbers drop, like it should, for such stupid, stupid policies.


These policies are not known until you are at your unit.


Yeah, that's all natural - you can do it, can't you? That's the definition of natural.


Some can not.

But you're saying soldiers can't have relationships at all?

Open relationships in uniform.

Can't have kids?

With out it being looked down upon.

Can't love someone else?

Can not show it in military uniform.

What kind of military is this?

The United States Military.
A dictatorship that is the United States Military.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:24:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I don't support the military. No offense to any members of the military, but I dislike its costs, discriminatory codes, rules, oppression, etc. Our military is located in over two hundred countries for crying out loud! Military spending takes up around 60% of the federal budget. It will only increase if Obama decides to further his war policies. The US has become another place that remains either ignorant or simply intolerant of its people.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:24:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:56:37 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 4/24/2010 12:26:03 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:

What??? There are gay people in the military, Comon.

I know.

Most of the military doesn't give a flying F about gay people in the military.

That is false.

No. From my experience, that's true. Maybe not honkey tonk Texans, but my ex gf was in the military - and gay - and most people didn't give a F. The enlisted just didn't tell the officers - because if they did, sh1t would go down. No one really cared.

Non the less pointless.

If someone commits a hate crime - YOU CRACK DOWN. Wouldn't you crack down on military members hazing blacks or hispanics? Do you think that it should be "don't ask don't tell" for blacks? Hey, you're black! Don't tell people your black so they wont hurt you!

That is not what the policy is about.
But going with your concept...
If DADT did go to blacks than it would punish someone for hazing black people for being black.
And it should apply to the opposite of black as well. Whites.
It protect everyone and stops people from walking up to people and asking if they are black.
An action that should never take place anyway.


Why would it matter if the person is black? The action of HARASSING a black person is wrong. Not being black. A black person can be as black as they want to be, as long as they do their job. Isn't that correct? As long as they follow the rules, they can be as dark as they want. DADT does not punish people for hazing gays. It punishes gays for being gay.


No. What you say is, if you F'ing touch a soldier because he is gay (black, hispanic, bi-racial, a hair dresser, whatever), that is a hate crime - you go to jail. Period. The same thing happened for blacks.


What?
I did not say that.


I never said you said that. I'm just telling you what a hate crime is and that hate crimes should be punished under US law.

Side note-
Jail is not the only form of punishment in the military.
It is not even in the top 5 things that get done to soldiers.


Well, they should go to jail, because that's what the US government uses as a punishment for hate crimes. Jail time. And I'm assuming you'd also get kicked out of the military for a hate crime.




This is not just about pictures, Comon.

I was using a common example.

These soldiers are not allowed to be in relationships because if the military finds out - they are kicked out with a dishonorable discharge.

Why would commander find out?
If it is DADT, they will never find out.


LOL! Do you think that under DADT no one finds out? People tell, Comon. People get caught on a date, or caught on the phone, or caught sending a romantic email, or caught with a picture of their boyfriend in their wallet. Whatever it may be, they get caught. I know people who have been caught.

If they get a picture of you kissing a girl should you be kicked out... no.
If they get a picture of you kissing a man should you be kicked out... no.

And in my unit the person was never kicked out.


Well your unit is really special. I know people who have been kicked out after a commander had found out they were gay.

DADT just stops people from talking about it. Something that should not be talked about in the military anyway.


So you shouldn't be talking about who you are? So black people shouldn't say a word about being black? So straight people shouldn't seem straight at all? Are you trying to produce an a-sexual, a-racial soldier? That's not American. Our founding fathers would look down upon that.


You being a soldier, you should know how horrible a dishonorable is.



They do not get a dishonorable any more.


Yeah, if you admit it. If you don't admit it, and just get caught, it's a dishonorable. If you just admit it - you just get discharged.

Nothing is stopping them from joining, but everything is stopping them from being who they are.

No it is not. They will be "who they are" no matter what.
It just stops them from going around bragging about it. A good thing.



Who the hell is bragging about being gay? That's not what this is about. I'm sure straight males say things about being straight all the time in the military. Don't they, comon? You have to be deaf not to believe this. I'm sure straight people in the military like one another all the time. Have you not gone through training? I have plenty of friends in the military who are straight and have relationships with other straight soldiers. Stupid idea. Bragging, HA.



WHAT? Are you seriously suggesting that people should be kicked out for having pictures of kissing someone?

Punished not kicked out. They should not be posting pictures of anyone kissing anyone you are not married to in the military. It is a part of the policy now. It happens all of the time. Soldiers are called in to the commanders office and told to take down the pictures they have on their myspace b/c it is unbecoming of a soldier.


So why does it make it ok if they are married?

(mostly in uniform or pictures found mixed in with them wearing a uniform in other pictures, that is what I am talking about)


Well, what about people who post a picture of a kiss and are not in uniform, or post a picture of them and their boyfriend and they are not in uniform?

That is the prude-est, stupidest thing I have ever heard in my life.

Can't be.


Well it is.

They aren't just kicked out for kissing, Comon.

Not talking about getting kicked out.


That is a stupid, stupid rule. Soldiers are human beings too.


If someone is suspected of having a homosexual relationship, they are kicked out.

Not in my unite. That is an incorrect assumption that gay activist for DADT like to boast.


No, it's not. I KNOW people who have gotten kicked out for having a homosexual relationship. Again, I KNOW PEOPLE WHO HAVE GOTTEN KICKED OUT FOR HAVING A HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIP. Loud and clear.


So, to be equal, if a straight person has a relationship they should be kicked out of the military?

We had gay people that had relationships in our unite. They were called "room mates". So are straight people that have a relationship and live together.


Your unit sounds really liberal and no following code. And again, this proves my point that people don't give a flying F if people are gay or in a relationship.

Straight soldiers have the ability to get married and take their spouses with them to bases. Gay soldiers are not allowed this privilege.

Because gay people are not allowed to get married at a federal level.
Your marriage has to be recognized at a federal level before the military will allow anyone to "bring their spouses with them to bases"


Point.

Why is it ok for a straight soldier to kiss someone, have a relationship with someone, but it is not ok for a gay soldier to do the same thing?


Gay soldiers can. Just not in the viewing eye of leadership. Just like straight people can
Straight will be chewed out if they are caught kissing anyone (not married too them) in public.


How is it "unsoldier-like" to kiss someone?

Because it is a now rule held among bases.


Why? What reasoning do they have behind this?

These soldiers are risking their LIVES for our country, and they can't even post a picture of the kissing someone or be in a relationship that makes them happy (like straight soldiers are already allowed to do).

I think you have it.
They can not get caught.

It is the army. A dictatorship. These things may seem hard to believe but really they are not.

The army sounds like a horrible thing to join.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:24:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 1:24:06 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I don't support the military. No offense to any members of the military, but I dislike its costs, discriminatory codes, rules, oppression, etc. Our military is located in over two hundred countries for crying out loud! Military spending takes up around 60% of the federal budget. It will only increase if Obama decides to further his war policies. The US has become another place that remains either ignorant or simply intolerant of its people.

10/10
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:26:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 1:24:53 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
At 4/24/2010 1:24:06 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I don't support the military. No offense to any members of the military, but I dislike its costs, discriminatory codes, rules, oppression, etc. Our military is located in over two hundred countries for crying out loud! Military spending takes up around 60% of the federal budget. It will only increase if Obama decides to further his war policies. The US has become another place that remains either ignorant or simply intolerant of its people.

10/10

Thank you.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:29:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 1:24:06 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I don't support the military. No offense to any members of the military, but I dislike its costs, discriminatory codes, rules, oppression, etc. Our military is located in over two hundred countries for crying out loud! Military spending takes up around 60% of the federal budget. It will only increase if Obama decides to further his war policies. The US has become another place that remains either ignorant or simply intolerant of its people.

Other than their not even being two hundred countries in the world and military spending accounting for more like 20% of the budget, I mostly agree. I don't support the military.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:30:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 12:26:03 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
What??? There are gay people in the military, Comon. Most of the military doesn't give a flying F about gay people in the military. If someone commits a hate crime - YOU CRACK DOWN. Wouldn't you crack down on military members hazing blacks or hispanics? Do you think that it should be "don't ask don't tell" for blacks? Hey, you're black! Don't tell people your black so they wont hurt you!

No. What you say is, if you F'ing touch a soldier because he is gay (black, hispanic, bi-racial, a hair dresser, whatever), that is a hate crime - you go to jail. Period. The same thing happened for blacks.


Lol, hate crime = Fail
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2010 1:32:48 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/24/2010 1:29:54 PM, Nags wrote:
At 4/24/2010 1:24:06 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I don't support the military. No offense to any members of the military, but I dislike its costs, discriminatory codes, rules, oppression, etc. Our military is located in over two hundred countries for crying out loud! Military spending takes up around 60% of the federal budget. It will only increase if Obama decides to further his war policies. The US has become another place that remains either ignorant or simply intolerant of its people.

Other than their not even being two hundred countries in the world and military spending accounting for more like 20% of the budget, I mostly agree. I don't support the military.

I am pretty sure that the US military is at least in one hundred countries. By the way, I am certain that the military spending is around 60%. Trust me, I have read and heard articles about military spending.
Exactly how many countries exist currently?