Since the thread on gay marriage was such a harrowing success, let's tackle another pink issue...

Quote :

Don't ask, don't tell is the common term for the policy about homosexuality in the U.S. military mandated by federal law Pub.L. 103-160 (10 U.S.C. § 654). Unless one of the exceptions from 10 U.S.C. § 654(b) applies, the policy prohibits anyone who "demonstrate(s) a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts" from serving in the armed forces of the United States, because it "would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability." The act prohibits any homosexual or bisexual person from disclosing his or her sexual orientation or from speaking about any homosexual relationships, including marriages or other familial attributes, while serving in the United States armed forces. The "don't ask" part of the policy indicates that superiors should not initiate investigation of a service member's orientation in the absence of disallowed behaviors, though mere suspicion of homosexual behavior can cause an investigation.

Thoughts? Should we continue this policy? Should we do away with it?

I actually agree with DADT and think its a fair compromise. If soldiers are there to serve, then their sexual orientation really shouldn't be discussed - period. Man just do your fucking job. I don't need to know about the details of your life.

DADT isn't a fair compromise at all. As soon as it's found out that the guy is gay, he is discharged. It is the same as "no gays allowed." The business about not needing to know about their private lives is one sided. Other soldiers and military personnel openly discuss their wives and girlfriends, and venture into off miliary base pubs and clubs to pick up women. When a gay guy does the exact same things, he is discharged.

Kral wrote:

I think the biggest reason they wanna keep gays out is because of the shower thing. lol

Yeah, because apparently those trained-for-combat military men can take being fired at with bazookas, and having live grenades thrown at them, but can't deal with the (imagined/paranoid) prospect of another dude popping wood around them in the shower.

stonestatic wrote:

DADT isn't a fair compromise at all. As soon as it's found out that the guy is gay, he is discharged. It is the same as "no gays allowed." The business about not needing to know about their private lives is one sided. Other soldiers and military personnel openly discuss their wives and girlfriends, and venture into off miliary base pubs and clubs to pick up women. When a gay guy does the exact same things, he is discharged.

Basically. DADT is just a front.

It's idiotic and should never have been enforced in the first place. Who the hell cares if a soldier is gay? Somebody once said if it weren't for all the homosexuals in the naval infantry there would be NO naval infantry.

I don't necessarily support keeping gays out of the military, just that sexuality in general be kept out of it.

So in a sense, I support the idea of don't ask, don't tell. I don't support firing somebody if it does come out, but straight or gay, they're not there to discuss their sexual orientation so regardless of which gender they prefer, they should just keep it all back home. The military isn't a place to be gay or straight, it's a place to be soldiers. If you are gay and want to be a solider, more power to you. If you are straight and want to be a soldier, more power to you. Just check your sexuality at the door until you get back.

Could you do that though? Could you go all that time not talking about your family or your spouse? Not having a picture of them? What about even getting a letter from your spouse back home? Because any of that would indicate who you're involved with.

Supernova wrote:

Could you do that though? Could you go all that time not talking about your family or your spouse? Not having a picture of them? What about even getting a letter from your spouse back home? Because any of that would indicate who you're involved with.

I don't really feel talking about your family or spouse is really talking about sexuality though, even if it gives away what your orientation is. As a whole, your sexuality should be something that isn't an issue no matter what it is, when you're in the military. No matter what you're orientation, it's an unneeded distraction.

Forgiveness_Man wrote:

I don't really feel talking about your family or spouse is really talking about sexuality though, even if it gives away what your orientation is. As a whole, your sexuality should be something that isn't an issue no matter what it is, when you're in the military. No matter what you're orientation, it's an unneeded distraction.

Well that is enough to get gay military personnel dismissed, just saying something (gender pronouns) that references what their sexuality is.

Personally I don't care if there are gays in the military. If they wanna serve their country, let them. They are not there to have sex, they are there to serve their country. What's the problem with letting them do it openly?

CatEyes10736 wrote:

Well that is enough to get gay military personnel dismissed, just saying something (gender pronouns) that references what their sexuality is.

Well, I never said that I fully agreed with such a practice. That doesn't mean the military should be a place where everyone wears their sexuality on their sleeve.

As someone who would flee to Canada if he was ever drafted, I can't argue against letting a gay guy join the military if he wants to. Though my guess is that military culture is equally (if not moreso) as homophobic as sports culture....so if gays wanna put themselves in that line of contention, then that's on them. Just don't whine if your fellow comrades aren't particularly receptive or welcoming to your being there. You wanted it, you deal with it.

Bill O'Reilly: Repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell

Quote :

"It's just not fair, they should stop this nonsense," he said.

Bill O'Reilly: Stop DADT | News | Advocate.com

It seems like Bill O'Reilly is becoming more moderate lately.

There's no logical reason for keeping gays out of the military. They just want to honorably serve their country like any other soldier does. It's like some fear a rancid orgy will break out if gay men are allowed in (they're already there and have been since the beginning)...but there will be no more sexual behavior that exists already. The same arrogant guys worried about gays checking them out in the shower would I bet be insulted if an out gay soldier DIDN'T bother to pay him any attention.

RobbieFTW wrote:

There's no logical reason for keeping gays out of the military. They just want to honorably serve their country like any other soldier does. It's like some fear a rancid orgy will break out if gay men are allowed in (they're already there and have been since the beginning)...but there will be no more sexual behavior that exists already. The same arrogant guys worried about gays checking them out in the shower would I bet be insulted if an out gay soldier DIDN'T bother to pay him any attention.

100% true. Gay & lesbian members of the military are not new. They have always existed & always will. And I know it may be shocking to some straight guys but not every gay guy "wants" them. It's ridiculous that given the sexual misconduct that exists in the military between straight people, they freak over this.

Don't ask, don't tell is bullshit. It really is. I don't care what orientation someone is when he or she signs up....they are doing something way more valuable for this country than the average American. And by "average" I mean that armchair political analyst who spews b.s. even though he or she is either not a voter, or voted without proper knowledge and understanding.
My friend, Jess is a lesbian, and she did more in Afghanistan than I could even dream to do here at home. As far as gay males, I don't see why there is such a stigma that they are not cut out for it, or they will bring something unwanted and unnecessary to the men they serve alongside with. They were not drafted, so they must have more patriotism then their straight peers.

There are a handful of inherent problems with the "sexuality shouldn't be an issue in the military" school of thought:

(1) It's wholly unrealistic. Sure, it sounds great that in theory people, gay or otherwise, would simply pretend to be asexual for their jobs. But such an idealistic goal is completely impossible to implement and ignores the unique situation of military service. You don't expect someone to go serve their country for X numbers of years without ever discussing sex or their sexuality in any context. This includes innocuous discussions of one's significant other which is a textbook example of the social aspects of human sexuality. This brings me to my next point.

(2) It's buttressed upon the misinformed assumption that gay and lesbian people who want to serve in the military also want to wear their homosexuality on their sleeves. This probably could not be much further from the truth. Indeed, there mere fact that a gay person wants to serve in the armed forces knowing of the rampant homophobia that exists therein would seem to imply that they are willing to treat their sexual orientation as secondary to their duty. Simply put, Americans need to snap out of this silly notion that gay people are not as varied and diverse as their straight counterparts. The same gay person who wants to serve in the military likely isn't the same gay person that also want to ride on a NYC Pride parade float in pink hot pants caked in queen makeup.

(3) It ignores how the DODT policy is actually implemented in the U.S. Armed Forces. Most gay people are not being discharged because they are making their sexuality an issue. They are being discharged merely because their sexual orientation have been discovered by the wrong personnel. They are having their emails combed or being reported by fellow soldiers who are homophobic. In essence, many highly-skilled soldiers are losing their jobs without ever "telling" or being "asked."

Clearly, DODT is an archaic policy that needs to be repealed but it will not be without difficulties. It is a unique challenge to have people simply ignore someone's homosexuality in an environment conducive to hyper-masculinity. Some backlash is inevitable but it will be weathered and corrected with time. As a practical matter, perhaps the armed forces should consider disciplining gay or straight soldiers who cause problems post-repeal like they would under any other scenario.

Chris wrote:

Since the thread on gay marriage was such a harrowing success, let's tackle another pink issue...

Thoughts? Should we continue this policy? Should we do away with it?

Well, I am gay AND in the military so obviously I'm against the policy. There really is no logical or even practical reason why it still exists beyond simple homophobia. Former Chairman JCS Peter Pace said that he believe homosexual acts were "immoral". The primary argument against gays serving openly in the militay is that heterosexuals would feel uncomfortable around them and that it would damage unit cohesion and morale. There are so many problems with that position it's hard to know where to start.

Firstly, it's exactly the same argumen they used in the 1940's to keep black troops in segregated units (because forcing white troops to cohabitate with them would damage unit cohesion and morale). Well, they forced integrated units and everything worked out just fine. Secondly, the assumption that unit cohesion would be negatively affected isn't based on anything. In fact, all the studies suggest that it would have no effect at all. Our allies (UK, Canada, Israel, etc) already have gays serving openly in their militaries and they haven't had these problems that we are worried about in the US. So why they think our military is LESS professional than theirs (even though we are supposed to be the superior military) is beyond anyone's guess. Finally, the military supposedly has a zero tolorance policy of discrimination and sexual harassment (at least that's what they preach). Unfortunately, it practices discrimination against gays and tolorates and expects sexual harassment of them. So basically, it's a big hypocracy!

One of the most ridiculous arguments I've heard supporting a ban on gays is that most of our military enlistees come from conservative backgrounds with Christian values and it's not fair to them to force them to live and work with people they would feel uncomfortable around! This statement comes from Elaine Donnelly, founder and President of the "Center for Military Readiness" (a made up organization that is not actually affiliated with the military in any way). I have personally found the military to be one of the most diverse organizations in the world and have met people from every background and all walks of life who've volunteered to serve their country and easily capable of living with, working with and tolorating their fellow servicemembers in order to accomplish the mission. The suggestion that most people in the military are conservative Christians is just ridiculous! Not only that, but even if it was 90% conservative Christians in the military, since when do we practice discrimination simply to cator to what would make some more "comfortable". If homophobes can't handle gays being in the military, then THEY should be the ones that get kicked out, not the gay servicemembers who haven't done anything wrong.

All of Elaine Donnelly's arguments are complete nonsense with no basis in reality and no facts to back them up, but they are pretty entertaining in a desperate and embarrassing sort of way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19sLj2zK3qM

RobbieFTW wrote:

There's no logical reason for keeping gays out of the military. They just want to honorably serve their country like any other soldier does. It's like some fear a rancid orgy will break out if gay men are allowed in (they're already there and have been since the beginning)...but there will be no more sexual behavior that exists already. The same arrogant guys worried about gays checking them out in the shower would I bet be insulted if an out gay soldier DIDN'T bother to pay him any attention.

I have to laugh at all this paranoia about gays in the military, have you ever heard of Dink Flamingo???? There are more str8 military men having sex with other men than gays.

Active Duty. Yessir.

Chris wrote:

Active Duty. Yessir.

Yep all Str8 military men doing it for money (and looking like they are having the time of their lives)

Bobby Garcia is another one dealing with Str8 Military men.

I'm sure everyone has heard by now:

DON'T ASK, DON'T TELL WAS DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!





It's a slow process, but we're winning legal equality and social respect! Some people are just going to have to get over having a problem with people who're different, or have a tough time existing as time progresses and we become a more and more enlightened society!

I think if someone is willing to volunteer for the military and possibly put there ass on the line for the rest of us their sexual preference shouldn't matter. I'd feel that way even if they were drafted. Just my opinion.