DADT perspectives

Christcorp said:
I agree with your assessment. I just thought it would be quite profound, to go from: "No, you can't be in the military, because you're gay".... to..... "Please sign here. We need MORE like you in the military, because you're gay"....
Click to expand...

I couldn’t imagine that happening! Just look at colleges these days they don’t care about race/gender/sexual orientation at all… Oh wait :yllol:

More on the topic I think it will be exactly what you said (much to the dismay of the people fighting). Most people don’t really care about GLB serving (I’m assuming yet I have no stats to back that up so prove me wrong if you have some statistic) But what would really tick me off if they started putting ads on TV and the radio saying “look we like gays now come join!” The same way they advertise “diversity” in colleges by saying how even people are, then letting lesser qualified people get in because of ethic background. I don’t want anything remotely like that happening with the armed forces. I would rather there be DADT then the polar opposite. I think they should be allowed it, but not like obsessing over gays joining and having “diversity” in the military. Thats one of my biggest pet peeves.
 
hum, to my knowledge/observations, I don't know of any universities that recruit based on sexual orientation. I've never seen that on an applications or noticed it as part of an admissions outreach program. Just more likely to see the university advertise they are non-discriminatory or "friendly" to minority groups.
 
temp said:
hum, to my knowledge/observations, I don't know of any universities that recruit based on sexual orientation. I've never seen that on an applications or noticed it as part of an admissions outreach program. Just more likely to see the university advertise they are non-discriminatory or "friendly" to minority groups.
Click to expand...

Ehh, I have some friends that are in college and some that are GLB, and they all say the colleges don’t officially try to recruit gays. But they make it “easier to get in”. They also use it as the best essay topic all the hardships, and challenges being gay has caused. I think you get the idea.

Like always try prove me wrong, if you have some evidence, because this topic in particular has few statistics (at least thats what I have noticed).
 
That first link was definitely a perspective I haven’t heard from a real (no just a kid looking for an argument) source. That idea was interesting, really made me think. BUT think conversation is getting off topic and might be better suited for the off topic forum, or PM.
 
In hindsight, I really dislike that article. lol Now that I actually read the full thing. I only got the portion dealing with recruitment when I googled. Didn't see the rooming argument and the obnoxious social order/downfall of society ending. So, while I'm sure I opened a pandora's box by not reading the full article first, I'll just say I found the recruitment part interesting. It points to the idea I said earlier about adding an orientation box. I know if I was applying for a university, I would be leaving any orientation boxes blank, that's just unnecessary IMO.
 
AF6872 said:
Just another perspective from some one who has not spent one day in the ranks or on the line but has an opinion. It is easy to quote Clausewitz from the podium but much harder to engage in the "Fog of War" or the real world. Was this a PC appointment??

http://patdollard.com/2010/11/washi...s-marine-corps-the-few-the-proud-the-problem/
Click to expand...

I don't see anything wrong with her assessment. General Amos made the point himself, when the law is repealed, the Marines will do it better than anyone else.

Nothing she says contradicts the values of the Marines or the military nor somehow screams that she knows better than those serving. It was a respectful and thoughtful article IMO.
 
Correction 1: IF the law is repealed
Correction 2: the Marines THINK they will do it better than anyone else.
 
The law will be repealed. The if part is when. Maybe in a month, maybe in 10 years, it will be repealed eventually.
 
I'll believe it when I see it....it may happen, but I wouldn't just assume so because Gates or AC360 says so...especially with the new congressional make up.
 
LineInTheSand said:
I'll believe it when I see it....it may happen, but I wouldn't just assume so because Gates or AC360 says so...especially with the new congressional make up.
Click to expand...

Again, I don't disagree with your if statement for the short term within the time we have Gates, the lame duck session, etc. I would say with certainty, personally, that we will see the repeal of DADT. Even if it takes 10, 20, 50 years. Hopefully less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top