Don't Ask Don't Tell

[Latopazora]

I personally think it should be replaced with a "no touchie" provision for everyone.  

[cherrydarlin999]

*cherry*

I don't have any problems with gays in the milatary. Though, I don't want to know that your gay either. I don't want to know your sexuality, and whatever you do in your personal life is none of my business. So, I do agree with the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy.  

[Pumona]

cherrydarlin999

*cherry*

I don't have any problems with gays in the milatary. Though, I don't want to know that your gay either. I don't want to know your sexuality, and whatever you do in your personal life is none of my business. So, I do agree with the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy.

I agree, who needs to know. Everyone needs to mind their own buisness.  

[Rainbowfied Mouse]

Pumona

cherrydarlin999

*cherry*

I don't have any problems with gays in the milatary. Though, I don't want to know that your gay either. I don't want to know your sexuality, and whatever you do in your personal life is none of my business. So, I do agree with the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy.

I agree, who needs to know. Everyone needs to mind their own buisness.

Many LGBT members have troubles with their sexuality, the phase "coming-out" is really a life-long struggle. Due to the USA's heterosexism, it makes it more difficult. Let's say it's at night, and the boys are talking about their girl's back home, and one is a gay member with a partner back home, what do you suppose they do?

"I don't have a girl." - Well this would mean that you are repressing the whole truth about that significant other back home, and you have to, because of don't ask, don't tell.

The point is, that it's not about being a flamboyant (/stereotype) person out in the field, Don't Ask, Don't Tell policies make it difficult when conversations like these pop up. The military don't constantly fight, nor should we ask them to. They live a different lifestyle, but their conversations are no different from the one's we have here.  

[Lord Bitememan]

Quote:

I agree, who needs to know. Everyone needs to mind their own buisness.

And that would be a fine position applied equally. Then it becomes "no sex in the military." That's fine. But, you're going to run into a whole host of problems with such a policy. It is equal though.  

[cherrydarlin999]

Rainbowfied Mouse

Many LGBT members have troubles with their sexuality, the phase "coming-out" is really a life-long struggle. Due to the USA's heterosexism, it makes it more difficult. Let's say it's at night, and the boys are talking about their girl's back home, and one is a gay member with a partner back home, what do you suppose they do?

Yeah, because I'm sure that's what they do in the baracks, talk about their girlfriends back home. (sarcasm) But really...how often would it be that the conversation would come up? And the gay member doesn't have to say anything. The point of the "Don't Tell" part, is to not tell.

Quote:

"I don't have a girl." - Well this would mean that you are repressing the whole truth about that significant other back home, and you have to, because of don't ask, don't tell.

No, you wouldn't be repressing the truth. He doesn't have a girl if he's gay. Just don't tell. Keep it to yourself.

Quote:

The point is, that it's not about being a flamboyant (/stereotype) person out in the field, Don't Ask, Don't Tell policies make it difficult when conversations like these pop up. The military don't constantly fight, nor should we ask them to. They live a different lifestyle, but their conversations are no different from the one's we have here.

If the conversation comes up, the gay officer should just say "I don't have a girl(or guy)" or they should just stray away from the conversation. Just do your job. Keep your sexuality to yourself.  

[Lord Bitememan]

Quote:

Yeah, because I'm sure that's what they do in the baracks, talk about their girlfriends back home.

Yeah, how about base housing? Married couples can move onto base in base housing once they get their assignments. We now have several married same-sex couples due to laws in Hawaii, California (briefly), Iowa, and Massachusetts. Obviously with Don't Ask Don't Tell married same sex soldiers can't move their spouses onto base. Now it ceases to be a matter of idle conversation and one of open discrimination in the way gay soldiers are treated with respect to base accommodation.

Quote:

If the conversation comes up, the gay officer should just say "I don't have a girl(or guy)" or they should just stray away from the conversation. Just do your job. Keep your sexuality to yourself.

And what other antipathies should we accommodate in this manner? Do we make black soldiers wear white face paint to accommodate all those rural southern white boys who don't care for the company of blacks? Should women in the military butch up and wear strap-ons so that sexists don't have to know they're serving with women? The only reason we have Don't Ask Don't Tell is because sexual orientation is not an outward personal characteristic, so we don't have to force people with hate issues to cope with them to do the job. Instead we force a group to wear a mask so as not to worry those with hate issues.

I'm sure you consider yourself a conservative. I'm also equally sure that you don't know who Barry Goldwater was. Barry Goldwater was the Arizona Senator who became the founder of the Reagan conservative movement within the Republican party. He ran against Lyndon Johnson in 1964 and lost big. In 16 years, one of his allies, Ronald Reagan, succeeded where he did not. Barry Goldwater though that hatred and discrimination of people was the stupidest of human endeavors. He was half Jewish himself, and barred from an Arizona country club due to that heritage. He mocked the stupidity thusly "I'm only half Jewish, can I join if I only play the first 9 holes?" He also had an apt quote for the issue of gays in the military too. Of that he said "You don't have to be straight to be in the military, you just have to shoot straight." Don't Ask Don't Tell is the equivalent of saying you can join the military if you only play the first 9 holes.  

[Rainbow Retch]

Maggie239

I am really in-between on this subject. For starters I know that alot of people have prejudices againt homo-sexual and bi-sexual people, so that might cause a probluem with the currrent soliders that sleep in the bunk above a homo or bi-sexual person. You can see that there might be a probluem there. Personaly I think that if you have a seperate division for women that you should have the same for homo and bi-sexual people. The probluem with this is that there might be a large amount of money put into something like this and then people don't take advantage of it. i may be wrong but that is just my opinion and I am not extremly firmiliar with this subject.

This doesn't quite make sense to me. The problem with homosexuals in the military is that they fall in love with their comrades, and if you just put all the homosexuals in one seperate division, then hell, it's like a dating service. For me, it's all up to what branch of the military a man/woman works in to determine whether being homosexual should be allowed. If you have a top branch where they are sent on deathly missions, then homosexuals shouldn't be allowed because romance between them might hinder the mission. Same with women.  

[Lord Bitememan]

Quote:

The problem with homosexuals in the military is that they fall in love with their comrades,

Wouldn't that argue, then, against women in the military? The likelihood of a straight man being accepting of the advances of a gay man while in the hyper-masculine environment of the military is laughable. A straight man and a straight woman, on the other hand? Quite likely.

Quote:

and if you just put all the homosexuals in one seperate division, then hell, it's like a dating service.

That would argue to the point of view that homosexuals are incapable of professionalism of any kind. I'd like to see some evidence in that regard.

Quote:

For me, it's all up to what branch of the military a man/woman works in to determine whether being homosexual should be allowed.

How about the commander of all those branches, aka the President? Last I checked his Constitutional role is as Commander in Chief. That would argue that this is a unilateral, one man decision to make, not a collective social decision. That would argue for Obama having full authority to decide, on his own, whether or not to have gays serve openly in the military.

Quote:

If you have a top branch where they are sent on deathly missions, then homosexuals shouldn't be allowed because romance between them might hinder the mission.

Again, we get back to this argument that gays have no professionalism. That's the only conclusion I can see in your insistence upon this point. Aside from that, your assertion is actually contradicted by history. The Theban Sacred Band, an openly gay unit in the Greek army, was one of the most effective of the city-state era. They even beat the Spartans. Only Alexander ever beat them.  

[Vasilius Konstantinos]

Why is this an issue?

Oddly most military organizations in the world at one time buggered their captured. So who cares if some of the men enjoyed it a little too much.  

[Magus Kathrine]

Gays don't belong in the army, because they chose to be sinners. They need to go to pray and get better. They'll rape other people, or they'll end up having orgies! They need to be forced to go to aversion therapy, not placed in the army!!!  

[Rainbowfied Mouse]

Magus Kathrine

Gays don't belong in the army, because they chose to be sinners. They need to go to pray and get better. They'll rape other people, or they'll end up having orgies! They need to be forced to go to aversion therapy, not placed in the army!!!

So you're saying they should be forced to therapy? You do realize that even if aversion therapy worked, that the person needs to be willing to go through with it.

Aversion Therapy is a hoeks. Churches put more money (and so do people that go through) to anti-homosexual action than they do towards the poor.  

[Lord Bitememan]

Quote:

Gays don't belong in the army, because they chose to be sinners.

Currently the military does not bar:
Adulterers
Wiccans
Buddhists
Hindus
Atheists
Blasphemers
People who don't observe the sabbath
Greedy People
Envious People
"Whore Mongers"

All of these are "sins" and yet we let them in the military.

Quote:

They'll rape other people,

The heterosexual army rapes people. In fact there was a famous incident of a gang rape in Okinawa about ten years ago. The rates of rape among homosexuals is not demonstrably higher than any other demographic.

Quote:

They need to be forced to go to aversion therapy

A government that can "force" them to go to aversion therapy for being gay wields enough power to, when liberals take over government, "force" you to go to aversion therapy for being a fundamentalist Christian. Freedom is a two way street, and for every conceivable way you can thin to threaten the freedom of another group, so to could your freedom be threatened. Society functions with stability because we do not threaten the freedoms of one another.  

[Rainbowfied Mouse]

@LB - does that list include sex offenders, *****, rapists and such?  

[Lord Bitememan]

The military of a generation ago would take all comers. Indeed, if you had a criminal record back in then, about the only place you could go was the military. Today they've changed that dramatically, and a criminal record is likely to disqualify you if you join. In particular, they will bar sex offenders.