Gays In The Military

[Mr. Habib]

Details Of Obama Openly Gay Military Released
WASHINGTON (SR) - President Barack Obama has directed the Pentagon to replace the "don't ask, don't tell" policy with one that will allow openly gay men and women to serve in the military.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, will present details of the plan to U.S. lawmakers next Tuesday.
According to sources inside the Pentagon, changes to be implemented include adding choreography to marching regimens, equipping all dorms with double-wide bunks, new fitted uniforms in seasonal color palettes, the installation of hot tubs, and more.
In a potentially controversial move, the Pentagon will announce the formation of a new all-gay, all male company tentatively named "69th Fighting Sodomites." Sources credit the creation of the 69th to House member Barney Frank, who has reportedly been working "very, very closely" with gay Pentagon officials.

 

[360]

Who cares as long as they aren't trying to spread their message to unwilling participants?

They have arms, legs, heads, and brains, and can shoot to kill just as well as anyone else.

 

[jeremy]

I don't care about your or their sexual orientation, as long as you do the job and do the job well.

 

[Militarypol21]

Did anyone see the looks on all the General's faces during the Obama State of the Union when he was talking the "Don't ask, Don't tell" Policy??

Priceless!!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rdrb-8sHr0A"]YouTube - Obama's State of the Union Address - Gays in the Military - Lol[/ame]

 

[CombatVet]

Don't ask don't tell is horse **** imo. Either allow them in or don't. I personally don't care if some one's gay. It's not really my business. The don't ask don't tell policy is a cop out in an attempt to appease Homophobes and Homosexuals imo. It's like the Government wanting to know how many rifles and what caliber they are, but instead saying "We can't ask you if you have rifles, and you can't tell us if you have rifles".

 

[Mr. Habib]

Don't ask don't tell is horse **** imo. Either allow them in or don't. I personally don't care if some one's gay. It's not really my business. The don't ask don't tell policy is a cop out in an attempt to appease Homophobes and Homosexuals imo. It's like the Government wanting to know how many rifles and what caliber they are, but instead saying "We can't ask you if you have rifles, and you can't tell us if you have rifles".

I agree. I don't care one way or the other what someones sexual preference is. What people do off base and on their own time is their own business, as long as it doesn't interfere with getting the job done. I just posted the op because I think it's hilarious, especially the Barney Frank part.

 

[Bapak2ja]

OTOH, Just for Your Consideration

Who cares as long as they aren't trying to spread their message to unwilling participants?

They have arms, legs, heads, and brains, and can shoot to kill just as well as anyone else.

Consider this. A straight woman does not want to shower with men. You see the obvious reasons. Men would be looking at her as a potential sex partner. You can imagine the leers, the jokes, the sly looks—and recognize the hostile environment that would exist for that woman.

Now, suppose you, a straight man (OK, I made some assumptions here, just follow the line of thought anyway), will be in the shower with openly gay men. The gay men will behave toward you as straight men behave toward that straight woman. The gays will be standing there admiring you, joking about you, leering and looking at you. How comfortable will you feel? Will you begin to fear rape as that woman would fear it in that situation? Will you be intimidated into behavior in which you would not otherwise participate?

Would you want your daughter to shower with men? Would you want your straight son to shower with gay men, or your straight daughter to be forced to shower with lesbians? Remember, this is what will be forced on our straight military troops.

Consider, too, how the gay movement has blacklisted and maligned anyone who does not sanction or support their cause. Will careers of straight officers be jeopardized because they refuse to participate or sanction such behavior?

These are considerations that make me care about this matter. I am concerned about the impact this will have on enlistment, on esprit de corps, and on effectiveness as a fighting force. These are serious matters and we all should care about it. It merits careful consideration.

 

[360]

Consider this. A straight woman does not want to shower with men. You see the obvious reasons. Men would be looking at her as a potential sex partner. You can imagine the leers, the jokes, the sly looks—and recognize the hostile environment that would exist for that woman.

Now, suppose you, a straight man (OK, I made some assumptions here, just follow the line of thought anyway), will be in the shower with openly gay men. The gay men will behave toward you as straight men behave toward that straight woman. The gays will be standing there admiring you, joking about you, leering and looking at you. How comfortable will you feel? Will you begin to fear rape as that woman would fear it in that situation? Will you be intimidated into behavior in which you would not otherwise participate?

Would you want your daughter to shower with men? Would you want your straight son to shower with gay men, or your straight daughter to be forced to shower with lesbians? Remember, this is what will be forced on our straight military troops.

Consider, too, how the gay movement has blacklisted and maligned anyone who does not sanction or support their cause. Will careers of straight officers be jeopardized because they refuse to participate or sanction such behavior?

These are considerations that make me care about this matter. I am concerned about the impact this will have on enlistment, on esprit de corps, and on effectiveness as a fighting force. These are serious matters and we all should care about it. It merits careful consideration.

Are you considering that gay people behave like flaming homosexuals who think about nothing but sex? Not all straight people think like that and neither do gay people. The way I read your post is that gay people walk around and think about sex 24/7. Not the case, just like it's not the case with most straight people. Sure there are exceptions, but it is unlikely you will find a sex starved gay man or woman enlisting in the military, because they probably have other priorities than serving their country.

 

[dboz]

They may not be sex starved when they enlist, but a year long tour in a war torn country may change there moral foundations

 

[IndyGunworks]

whats wrong w/ the current policy? if both sides are happy w/ it, both sides get a little, and have to give a little (no pun intended)
i think the way it is now is working just fine and shouldnt be changed in EITHER direction.

 

[hornadylnl]

The feminists are arguing to allow women into combat arms as well. It won't work until MEN and WOMEN can act like adults and shower and bunk together without shagging each other. What makes you think gays will be any different? If a gay guy has a right to shower with me, shouldn't I have a right to shower with women?

If you would have asked me about gays in the military when I was in, I'd say hell no. Now, I don't think I'd much care. I don't know any openly gay people but from what I here, most of them aren't trolling amongst the straight crowd anyway. Supposedly they can tell a guy is gay before they even talk to them so I don't think I'd have to worry about being hit on very much anyway. I wouldn't be offended if a guy approached me and left me alone once I said I wasn't interested. If they kept harassing me, then I have a problem. What the gay movement wants with these protection laws is to be able to harass people and hide behind the law. If you continually harass a woman and she kicks you in the balls, you had it coming to you. If a gay harasses you and you hit them, you're going to jail.

Unfortunately, I don't think we can all act like adults for it to work.

 

[mk2ja]

Disclaimer: I haven't served in the military.

I don't think the DADT policy should be changed — at least, not yet.

The military should not be treated as a political battleground. A survey of the military was published recently, that revealed that opposition to the DADT policy has dropped sharply, from 63% to 51% opposing the policy. IMHO, the government shouldn't enact that kind of change within the military until the opposition to it is considerably less because it won't be nearly as big of an issue.

We all know that tolerances change over generations as new children are raised with decreasing prejudice. What that study indicates is that the military has already seen a marked change in the way they view the issue. Given more time, I would expect the opposition to continue to drop. Re-examine the issue again later.

Taking a different approach, I don't think that politicians should be making this kind of policy about the military. Leave that to those men who have made a career of serving our country, who have invested so much, who've made sacrifices of various kinds, and who know what it is like to serve. The men and women who have moved up through the ranks and know what life is like in the military are the ones who should be making this kind of decision, and they should do so when they are convinced that such a change would not noticeably adversely affect those ranks.

With all due respect to the President (not very much, if any, of course), he never served a day of his life in the military — what makes him think he has the wisdom to make such a change within an institution with which he has NO experience? That'd be like taking a law professor and making him President! Or like appointing somebody who can't figure out Turbo Tax to be the Secretary of the Treasury!

Oh... wait...

 

[shibumiseeker]

GLB folks already serve in the military alongside everyone else. Dropping DADT will not change that, the main result is that a few might feel a little more open about expressing who and what they are, but it's not going to result in the flaming behavior and open leering in the showers that the 'phobes are talking about. Why? Because there is a lot of social pressure against that kind of behavior already, and that is completely independent of DADT and won't go away once DADT is dropped. Units already have informal ways of getting rid of troublemakers, and that won't change either. If a soldier is competent and accepted by his or her unit then it doesn't matter one whit to anyone else what his or her orientation is.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

IMO, this is one area that civilians ought to keep their EFING noses out of .

 

[hickuleas]

What has this world come to ? No i dont agree with gay and lesbians trying to push the preverted lifestyle on all of us. If i **** some queers off so what you are making others upset. The american people should be able to vote on this issue because we as taxpayers bankroll the military.

 

[jeremy]

Consider this. A straight woman does not want to shower with men. You see the obvious reasons. Men would be looking at her as a potential sex partner. You can imagine the leers, the jokes, the sly looks—and recognize the hostile environment that would exist for that woman.

Now, suppose you, a straight man (OK, I made some assumptions here, just follow the line of thought anyway), will be in the shower with openly gay men. The gay men will behave toward you as straight men behave toward that straight woman. The gays will be standing there admiring you, joking about you, leering and looking at you. How comfortable will you feel? Will you begin to fear rape as that woman would fear it in that situation? Will you be intimidated into behavior in which you would not otherwise participate?

Would you want your daughter to shower with men? Would you want your straight son to shower with gay men, or your straight daughter to be forced to shower with lesbians? Remember, this is what will be forced on our straight military troops.

Consider, too, how the gay movement has blacklisted and maligned anyone who does not sanction or support their cause. Will careers of straight officers be jeopardized because they refuse to participate or sanction such behavior?

These are considerations that make me care about this matter. I am concerned about the impact this will have on enlistment, on esprit de corps, and on effectiveness as a fighting force. These are serious matters and we all should care about it. It merits careful consideration.

As a serving member, who the f*ck cares. If you got the stones, the intestinal fortitude to stand next to me in the heat. I don't care what your sexual orientation is, gay, lesbian, bi, tri, or what the h*ll ever it be.

There have been homosexuals in society and the military throughout history. What does it matter if someone is a homosexual if they possess the guts to fight for you?! I have known several in the service who were homosexuals. So what?! I am secure in my self, my sexuality, and my manhood enough to deal with it. Grow up and let us who are willing to die decide what we can and can not be comfortable with...

Quit using the Military as the sounding board for society! If politicians and civilians can not quit playing armchair generals are military is doomed...

 

[bigg cheese]

Also something to be noted is that the military is not a democracy. They own you. If you don't like the orders, whatever they may be, don't join.

 

[jeremy]

Also something to be noted is that the military is not a democracy. They own you. If you don't like the orders, whatever they may be, don't join.

If this is directed at me... LOL... I know the price I pay far better than some do...

Actually the Military is closer to being a Republic...

They do not own you. I signed a contract for services rendered for XX number of years. There is always an option out a contract. You can resign from the Military at anytime you so choose to.

 

[Hoosier8]

There were gays in the military in the 70's, there are gays in the military now. BFD.

The new recruits are much less apt to be judgmental about it.

 

[james e]

???

i was driving down the road one day with my 10y old son and we seen two men kissing in a car.he ask me why they was doing that and he thought that it was wrong.he is just 10y old and he knows right from wrong.i dont think it is right.but if they dont bug me i wont bug them.but i dont want to be around them.