Don't Ask Don't Tell

[xxTyeTye]

I would like too see what how you guys feel about the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy
_________________________________________________________________

In case you do not no what it is this policy mandates the soldiers may not be asked their sexuality, and if they are found to be a homosexual or a bi-sexual they are kick out right away, often with out evidence, about 300 soldiers have been kick out since Obama's Presidency.

I feel this is very discriminatory, against what America stands for and is stupid when we need soldiers the most.  

[Lord Bitememan]

If it were applied equally it wouldn't be a problem. If you couldn't be openly heterosexual in the army, it would be fine to preclude homosexuals from coming out as well. Ah, imagine, a military more concerned about how they handle the big guns than the little ones. . . but I digress. Short of that sort of total divorce of sexuality from the military, scrap the policy we need every soldier we can get.  

[Rainbowfied Mouse]

I don't like that it applies to LGB members that want to be in the army. It seems utterly stupid. "You can't fight for your country because your gay." However, if ever a draft were to happen (unlikely) the policy would be quickly dropped (I'm sure.) However, I would hope that if a draft happened they'd allow some gay people to stay with their children (if they adopted.)  

[Pumona]

Rainbowfied Mouse

I don't like that it applies to LGB members that want to be in the army. It seems utterly stupid. "You can't fight for your country because your gay." However, if ever a draft were to happen (unlikely) the policy would be quickly dropped (I'm sure.) However, I would hope that if a draft happened they'd allow some gay people to stay with their children (if they adopted.)

If there ever is a draft again It probably would be dropped. Without getting into details, if there were gays in the barracks I think it would be very uncomfortable for the ones that are not gay.  

[Lord Bitememan]

Actually a lot of polling data among the military recently has shown support for gays serving openly in the military.  

[Pumona]

I just read this:
In the new Post-ABC poll, military veterans are less apt than others to say gay people should be allowed in the military. While 71 percent of veterans said gay people who do not declare themselves as such should be allowed to serve, that number drops sharply, to 50 percent, for those who are open about their sexuality. Non-veterans, by contrast, are as likely to support those who "tell" as those who do not.

Just something interesting to add

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/18/AR2008071802561.html


Besides I did not say everyone would be uncomfortable in the barracks but, I still believe alot of them would be.  

[Lord Bitememan]

Some of them might be uncomfortable with blacks too, should everyone in the military have to wear white face paint?  

[Pumona]

Lord Bitememan

Some of them might be uncomfortable with blacks too, should everyone in the military have to wear white face paint?

First of all blacks and gays are no where near the same subject so, I'm not going there. We were discussing Don't ask Don't tell. I'm fine with gays in the military if they do not go around showing it (some really do) and if their tough enough. Same with women, they have to be strong and tough.  

[Lord Bitememan]

Quote:

First of all blacks and gays are no where near the same subject so, I'm not going there.

Well who do you think it is that's going to have problems with gays in the unit? It's the same good old boys who weren't too keen on having blacks in their unit 40 years ago. We lived through, and maintained a military when we integrated it (despite the very segregationist roots of the country at the time) and we will live through and maintain a military with gays openly serving in it too.

Quote:

I'm fine with gays in the military if they do not go around showing it

This stems from the belief that somehow gays can't be professionals; that somehow the gay will beat out the professionalism in them. It's not like they're going to run around with their uniform shirts tied off in that little knot and prance around shouting "yoo-hoo" to the officers. They will behave like professionals; they will dress like everyone else, salute, march in cadence and formation, and abide by the same behavioral standards as everyone else, or they will be kicked out for not behaving according to the standards of conduct of a soldier. But frankly your position on this is no different than saying you'd be fine with blacks in the military as long as they do whatever it takes to make sure we don't know they're blacks. Enter the white face paint.  

[Rainbowfied Mouse]

Pumona

I'm fine with gays in the military if they do not go around showing it (some really do) and if their tough enough. Same with women, they have to be strong and tough.

Just to let you know a little fact about flamboyancy, it's not really something that one controls. So speaking with the lisp is not something that gay people purposely do as mimicry to stereotype, dressing is pretty much the only controllable thing without behavioral therapy. And as LB has already said, they will be in the mask of the military...  

[Pumona]

Lord Bitememan

Quote:

First of all blacks and gays are no where near the same subject so, I'm not going there.

Well who do you think it is that's going to have problems with gays in the unit? It's the same good old boys who weren't too keen on having blacks in their unit 40 years ago. We lived through, and maintained a military when we integrated it (despite the very segregationist roots of the country at the time) and we will live through and maintain a military with gays openly serving in it too.

Quote:

I'm fine with gays in the military if they do not go around showing it

This stems from the belief that somehow gays can't be professionals; that somehow the gay will beat out the professionalism in them. It's not like they're going to run around with their uniform shirts tied off in that little knot and prance around shouting "yoo-hoo" to the officers. They will behave like professionals; they will dress like everyone else, salute, march in cadence and formation, and abide by the same behavioral standards as everyone else, or they will be kicked out for not behaving according to the standards of conduct of a soldier. But frankly your position on this is no different than saying you'd be fine with blacks in the military as long as they do whatever it takes to make sure we don't know they're blacks. Enter the white face paint.

No, my position on this subject is I do not care if it is a white, black, woman, gay or any other heritage in the military as long as they fight for or country and are not weak.  

[Lord Bitememan]

Pumona

No, my position on this subject is I do not care if it is a white, black, woman, gay or any other heritage in the military as long as they fight for or country and are not weak.

Right, and that should be the only consideration. Right now, however, what you have articulated is not the status quo. Right now we have qualifiers on it, and one of those qualifiers is "no gays."  

[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.  

[Lord Bitememan]

I'm going to discount your "the soldiers would feel uncomfortable" argument as 1. it's already been addressed and 2. it detracts from your much more salient point. Believe it or not, the logistics and facilities argument is one I have heard before, and it is the single most credible point I've ever seen brought up. When I asked a marine about it once, the way he explained it was this "Not every female marine wants to sleep with every male marine, but we still have different facilities. You would have to have different facilities for them on the same basis that you have different facilities for men and women, and not every locale will have the logistics to support that."

I've never been able to think of a good answer for it. I still disagree with it, and would not base a policy of exclusion on it, but admit I can't readily think of an answer to it.