Commandant of the Marine Corps says no to Gays

[SavageEagle]

the "Gay" Corps...
Improvise, adapt and come all over!

Puts a face on the butt of a lot of jokes for sure!

 

[semperfi211]

i guess. although I think the number of gay marines is higher than they think. i mean how could it not be when they are the ones running behind us Army guys to catch up and staring at our gorgeous asses the whole time

And to think I have positive repped you so many times, I am hurt.

 

[Joe Williams]

snip

I have yet to have someone admit they committed heterosexual sodomy when they served. Apprarently that's much more rare than I assumed it to be.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

See, it works. It works for everybody.

 

[Ol' Wiley]

Sexuality, whether homo or hetero, shouldn't be an issue. Shut your face and do your job. Once it becomes an issue, gtfo.

 

[Sgt Rock]

I hate when the "Westboro Baptist" types have to come on here and give their self-righteous opinions regarding this topic. You really are inflicting more hurt to the cause that you think you are defending.

Cause?? If you think allowing gays to serve openly in the military is not detrimental to the mission, then either you have never served a minute in uniform or you are naive beyond belief.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

OK, so what do we see in this picture?

The two on the left are wearing their army gloves. Oh but wait - there's more.

The one on the far left is grabbin his own ass.

The next one is playing a little pocket pool while checking out the first one grabbing his own ass.

Chubbs is checking out the guy playing pocket pool checking out the guy grabbing his own ass.

The fourth guy wishes the others would tell.

i guess. although I think the number of gay marines is higher than they think. i mean how could it not be when they are the ones running behind us Army guys to catch up and staring at our gorgeous asses the whole time

And to think I have positive repped you so many times, I am hurt.

 

[Booya]

i guess. although I think the number of gay marines is higher than they think. i mean how could it not be when they are the ones running behind us Army guys to catch up and staring at our gorgeous asses the whole time

Ranger, That hurts my sole a bit, but really the reason we're back there is to yell at the guys in r3126's picture who've fallen out of the run, to GTFO of the way!

You know? You USED TO BE well thought of (at least by me). After that remark I am searching for the NEG REP button.

 

[Booya]

And to think I have positive repped you so many times, I am hurt.

I'm not going to go into my whole opinion on the matter in depth. DADT works. However, I will say this, I'd rather have the 2 gay guys that fatty in the picture ate for breakfast beside me then someone who is so obviously not psychically qualified. What an embarrassment.

 

[E5RANGER375]

LOL, well I knew i would get a little friendly rivalry going out of my comment, but I never expected to go blind from looking at some fatties.

what a discrace to the uniform those guys are.

 

[dross]

LOL, well I knew i would get a little friendly rivalry going out of my comment, but I never expected to go blind from looking at some fatties.

what a discrace to the uniform those guys are.

They always bring out the National Guard and Reserve and call them "Army."

Just like Abu Graihb. I tried to explain to everyone I know that mess would have been very unlikely to happen if it had been a regular Army unit assigned to that prison, rather than a bunch of inbred guardsmen from bum***k.

I don't know about you, but when I was an NCO and had come upon that crap going on, it would have stopped right then.

Bet you a million bucks that those fat guys in the picture are not regular Army.

 

[EnochRoot43]

I think that people who talking about "gays openly serving" might have an unrealistic mental picture. Nobody is going to be prancing about with their tshirt knotted in front of them singing showtunes. It is really not an issue of gays "openly" serving, because throwing sexuality in anyone's face is disrespectful and rude, and would not be tolerated. What repealing DADT is really about is not summarily drumming out quality servicepeople who are found out or snitched on. Worrying about sexualized living conditions is also a non-issue because there are already policies in place to handle any inappropriate conduct, including sexual harassment. Those worrying about gay people "checking them out"....well guess what....there is a damn good chance you have been checked out today already if you went out in public at all. You didn't get cooties, and you didn't catch teh gay, so deal with it.

I have a couple friends who are a gay couple....they are both veterans of multiple tours of Iraq and Afghanistan. One is an NCO, and is highly respected by those in their command. The other has saved multiple lives after being involved in ambushes.

The fact that these two people could be discharged from the service they love if anyone finds out who they kiss at night is shameful. This is why DADT should be repealed.

 

[Indy317]

Those worrying about gay people "checking them out"....well guess what....there is a damn good chance you have been checked out today already if you went out in public at all. You didn't get cooties, and you didn't catch teh gay, so deal with it.

'You didn't get cooties, and you didn't get harmed, so deal with it.' Should that be the comment given to female soldiers when some male soldiers decide they want to shower with the female soldiers?

 

[dross]

'You didn't get cooties, and you didn't get harmed, so deal with it.' Should that be the comment given to female soldiers when some male soldiers decide they want to shower with the female soldiers?

I decided a long time ago that I wanted to shower with female soldiers. Come to think about it, I HAVE showered with female soldiers. More than once.

You guys with the showers all the time. Personally, I prefer not to spend so much time thinking about man*ss, but hey, to each their own.

 

[EnochRoot43]

Nice red herring.

These topics have nothing to do with one another. 1. Gays are ALREADY showering with straights. 2. Co-Ed showers are not under discussion whatsoever. It is highly unlikely to ever become practice, because it would be an obvious distraction. BUT BUT BUT Gays are a distraction in the shower! Review point 1. They are already there. They have been there for as long as there has been such a thing as a military.

This discussion isn't about opening the floodgates and allowing an entire Pride parade to don uniforms and create the GLBT Company.....it is only about being reasonable before discharging skilled and combat proven troops just because of what they do in the privacy of their bedroom.

If the only responses of those opposed are constantly colored with logical fallacies, then maybe they should either examine their logic or admit that their heart guides them rather then their brain.

 

[SavageEagle]

Ouch. I'd say someone got (*).

Oh, and I do let my heart guide me through life, but that doesn't mean my brain has no say in the matter. You might try it once. It might do you some good.

 

[Indy317]

1. Gays are ALREADY showering with straights. 2. Co-Ed showers are not under discussion whatsoever. It is highly unlikely to ever become practice, because it would be an obvious distraction. BUT BUT BUT Gays are a distraction in the shower! Review point 1. They are already there. They have been there for as long as there has been such a thing as a military.

They are there, but not very well known by the VAST majority of the service members. Every single post I see about this about known gay service members is about how only a very, very select few fellow members know the truth. We don't have co-ed showers, and it is based upon human sexuality, American morals and views on nudity, and again, human sexuality and the distractions that it causes in _this_ country. Yet somehow we are to think that if hundreds, thousands of homosexual humans start admitting their sexual attraction to the same sex will cause no issues for other service members of the same sex? Give me a break. Yea, they are already there, not well known either. Once the truth comes out, that does change things.

I decided a long time ago that I wanted to shower with female soldiers. Come to think about it, I HAVE showered with female soldiers. More than once.

You guys with the showers all the time. Personally, I prefer not to spend so much time thinking about man*ss, but hey, to each their own.

So are coed showers standard practice, or was this stuff done outside the policies that are set? It isn't about thinking about another guy's @$$, it is wondering what they are thinking about your own @$$. It isn't straight guys getting busted in the shower facilties at places like the YMCA, NIFS, etc.. So I do think there is an issue when the person you are showering with might be turned on by the sight of nudity, reguardless of gender. This is exactly why coed showers are not the norm for entities (universities, high schools, military, work out facilities, etc) in the US. Human sexuality plays a part in this, and it will damn sure affect single gender shower facilities it the sexual preference of the persons around you are known to be people of your gender.

I personally could careless about who is gay or straight, but human sexuality, American sexuality, American morals, etc. will come into play here. Maybe in the future, things won't be as bad, but right now...it won't be a good thing. It will cause more problems in these rare situations that happen. I have worked in higher education. There were constant problems of openly gay students and their stright roommates not being able to get along. It is just the nature of things. It isn't always the case, but differences are bound to come to a head in some cases.

 

[dross]

So are coed showers standard practice, or was this stuff done outside the policies that are set?

Personally, I didn't check with policy or regulations when the opportunity presented itself to shower with female soldiers. In fact, there was most likely some sodomy as defined by the UCMJ that went on before the shower. Just sayin'.

It isn't about thinking about another guy's @$$, it is wondering what they are thinking about your own @$$.

I don't wonder about that at all. Since you ask, I assume they think what any discerning person would likely think, which is, Nice@$$.

 

[Joe Williams]

snip

Worrying about sexualized living conditions is also a non-issue because there are already policies in place to handle any inappropriate conduct, including sexual harassment.
snip.

So you DO support co-ed baracks and showers, since there are policies in place to deal with inappropriate conduct and sexual harrassment?

 

[Joe Williams]

Nice red herring.

snip.

It's not a red herring. Calling it that is an outright, deliberate lie, a desperate maneuver designed to hide the truth of what you are advocating.

Why not be honest about the situation, if you have such moral high ground to claim?

 

[Joe Williams]

I decided a long time ago that I wanted to shower with female soldiers. Come to think about it, I HAVE showered with female soldiers. More than once.

You guys with the showers all the time. Personally, I prefer not to spend so much time thinking about man*ss, but hey, to each their own.

How nice. Not so nice, though, is that you are now advocating having that situation forced upon them, and others.

You didn't strike me as the kind of person who would advocate forcing others into unwelcome sexual contact, but there it is.