Amazon.com Widgets

Is it ethical to exclude homosexuals from the military, due to heterosexuals being uncomfortable with them in living arrangements, should the be separate

Asked by: geniusseeker
Is it ethical to exclude homosexuals from the military, due to heterosexuals being uncomfortable with them in living arrangements, should the be separate
  • Posted by: GoodWillHunting

    Let's say two people join the Marine Corps. Sandra is a lesbian who doesn't want to be a woman anymore, and Dan is a straight man. One day on patrol, Dan gets his legs blown off by an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) planted by the side of the road. So they ship Dan to a military hospital where they an only remove the dead tissue, provide antibiotics, and bandage it. He then gets a crappy twenty dollar wheelchair and no option for prosthetic legs after physical rehab. Do you know why he doesn't get new legs? Because the money that could've been used to buy his new legs has already been spent so that Sandra could get her boobs cut off because she wants to be Sandray instead.

    The point I'm trying to communicate is that it doesn't matter if you are a homosexual or not. There are plenty of gay men and women in the military. However, it does matter when your spending money to remove your sexual organs and causing lieutenant Dan to have to by his own legs. The same system goes for anybody in the military. If your Muslim and there is a record saying that you served the Taliban for five years, chances are you aren't going to get into the military. The same system works for whites, blacks, asians, muslims, everybody. I also feel the headline for this opinion was worded wrongly, due to the fact that gays are not banned from the military, only transgenders. Thanks for at least glancing at my argument, and remember: "Make America Great Again.

  • It just costs too much.

    Let's say two people join the Marine Corps. Sandra is a lesbian who doesn't want to be a woman anymore, and Dan is a straight man. One day on patrol, Dan gets his legs blown off by an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) planted by the side of the road. So they ship Dan to a military hospital where they an only remove the dead tissue, provide antibiotics, and bandage it. He then gets a crappy twenty dollar wheelchair and no option for prosthetic legs after physical rehab. Do you know why he doesn't get new legs? Because the money that could've been used to buy his new legs has already been spent so that Sandra could get her boobs cut off because she wants to be Sandray instead.

    The point I'm trying to communicate is that it doesn't matter if you are a homosexual or not. There are plenty of gay men and women in the military. However, it does matter when your spending money to remove your sexual organs and causing lieutenant Dan to have to by his own legs. The same system goes for anybody in the military. If your Muslim and there is a record saying that you served the Taliban for five years, chances are you aren't going to get into the military. The same system works for whites, blacks, asians, muslims, everybody. I also feel the headline for this opinion was worded wrongly, due to the fact that gays are not banned from the military, only transgenders. Thanks for at least glancing at my argument, and remember: "Make America Great Again."

  • It promotes unfair assumptions of the LGBT+ community.

    It is not ethical to assume that those who are homosexual will attempt to "make a move" or make an effort to seduce a heterosexual person.

    Just like it is unethical to assume that:
    - every Muslim individual is a terrorist,
    or
    - all black people are street thugs out to steal your money.

    There would be an immediate outrage if people were to ask for segregated living arrangements based on skin color or religion, so why is sexuality any different?

  • The problem isn't homo

    It is clearly not ethical to discriminate based solely on sexual preference. The problem that you could argue has to deal with Transgender people as that is a mental disorder. Even then as long as you are able to pass the requirements for joining the military I see no reason as to why you should be denied a chance to serve your country

  • The only person allowed to avoid entering (if drafted) the military are those physically incapable (and this would be by choice.)

    Just as how gender and race is not an exception to avoid being included in the military, there should be no exception made to those in the LGBT community. The only legitimate reason for any person to not be in the military is due to a physical incapability, and even they could be included in the military. This is absolutely unethical and is a form of discrimination, and a loop hole for those who would be drafted to the military.

    Realistically, in the military, you should be drained from all the work throughout the day rather than worry about a homosexual sleeping near you. If they don't touch you, then why worry? If you're heterosexual and uncomfortable even if the LGBT person does not do anything, then it is no one else's fault but yours. Suck it up and worry about your life.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.