Obama reaffirms will end 'don't ask, don't tell'

America's Finest:
My question was my attempt at humor, guess I need to work on the delivery.:biggrin:

But I was trying also to show the absurdity of changing the entire military to please vocal special interest groups of civilians:thumbdown:
 
In all honesty, for those of you who believe that openly serving gays in the military will ruin our military and all of that nonsence. Guess what the arguement was over letting blacks into our military, look how that ended up.

I know the military doesn't enjoy change all that much, but hey, without change, we'd still be using clubs and rocks to kill eachother right?

Just give it an honest though, will gays in the military ruin our country? Let's put on our big boy and girl pants, no, they won't.
 
Gflax, I think those who are actually in the military might have some opinions on the issue. Personally I know I few people who have been booted for being homosexuals... and I think they would have served well. Logistics however need to be worked out...what are the berthing situations first off?
 
I have no military background, and so I cannot speak from experience, but I can speak for a couple friends of mine who are jealous of me for simply having the opportunity to serve. As homosexuals, they are not afforded that option, as they are opposed to living a lie. As they themselves have put it, they have learned to live with the remarks and glares, but they cannot learn to live with lying to their best friends.
 
homosexuality is a life style choice If one wishes to make the military a career it is not an option that is available.

You don't join a company and expect the company to change it's policies to make you happy. If you did you would be unemployed very shortly.

The military is a voluntary organization, you have the option of joining it or not. Those who enlist in the military under the assumption that the military is going to change to make them happy will experience quite a let down.
 
homosexuality is a life style choice
Click to expand...

You really can't be serious, can you? It is not a choice. With that logic if roles were reversed and homosexuality was the norm, would you want the homosexual to tell you that heterosexuality is a choice. Of course, you would scream from the rooftop that you don't want to be shunned or ridiculed for "your choice".

I can't believe anybody would want to live their life explaining why they are attracted to the same sex simply because that is a choice. This is why many homosexuals get married because they believe that they can do it. I know several,, my godmother for one who got married, only later to come out. Her partner of 27 yrs was married before and had 3 children. My heart cringes for her knowing that her sex life must have been horrific for all those yrs.

I am for homosexuals being able to openly serve. As LITS and I have stated there are some logistical nightmares if we repeal DADT without federally recognizing gay unions.

Why not do both?
Click to expand...

Luigi, in the end, yes, do both, but pass the federal law first. If you allow DADT to be repealed first without a federal statute, than we go back to what I stated earlier, a soldier married in NH, with that as their HOR will than fight to get the married benefits, which includes housing, medical, dental, shopping on base, etc. The soldier from CA will not be allowed to have their "spouse" receive the same benefits. This becomes the nightmare for the military. Changing the federal law will make repealing DADT easier, since every gay member will be allowed the same benefits as the hetero member, thus, DADT is moot. Your gay okay, married okay, not married okay...let's move on.

As I stated earlier my godmother is gay, has been her entire life. I know for a fact that she never tried to convert me. When I was young she took me out every Saturday for the whole day. My folks knew she was gay and had no qualms, in actuality we always had pity for her because she would have been a great mother. Gay people will not try to convert another military member. If there is a fear of sexual advances or maybe even rape, let's be honest that already occurs in the military. You will always have those kinds of people in society, sexual orientation does not make you more likely to or not to commit sexual crimes.
 
Pima said:
You really can't be serious, can you?
Click to expand...

Yes I'm serious.
As the gay community always likes to point out there is no difference physically or mentally between gays and straights.

The AMA has stated that homosexuality is not a disease nor mental illness.

A common link has not been found such as being abused as a child, or other environmental causes.

There has not been a cause for someone being gay other than they CHOOSE TO BE.


these are only my opinions, but the fact is on this topic there are no facts.
 
gunner1zeus said:
Yes I'm serious.
As the gay community always likes to point out there is no difference physically or mentally between gays and straights.

The AMA has stated that homosexuality is not a disease nor mental illness.

A common link has not been found such as being abused as a child, or other environmental causes.

There has not been a cause for someone being gay other than they CHOOSE TO BE.


these are only my opinions, but the fact is on this topic there are no facts.
Click to expand...

I am no scientist, but there is sufficient data to support the theory that homosexuality- like heterosexuality- is based on chemical balances. I know people who have been abused and terrorized for their homosexuality, people who have wished very hard that they had been born heterosexual so they could avoid it. I don't know why some people are homosexual and others are heterosexual, and as a heterosexual I cannot begin to pretend to understand how homosexuals feel about this issue, but I believe no one wakes up one morning and decides "today I'm going to be gay".
 
I agree, many people theorize that it is a chemical balance in the brain, or perhaps a genome that has yet to be found. Please take no offense, but you are young, In years to come, what if they came out and said it is medical, would you then accept them or feel that it is still their choice, especially if there is a magic pill like viagara to make them heterosexual? Would you then say that because they don't want to risk their health to become heterosexual that then it is wrong?

I respect your opinion, I just happen to disagree that it is a choice.

BTW the AMA still has not found the cancer gene, who knows there could be a sexual orientation gene too!
 
As of today:

President = 1 Democrat

House = 256 Democrat & 177 Republican

Senate = 58 Democrat, 2 Independent & 40 Republican

Who can stop the process. Make the decision and live with the consequences. You can't stay on the fence forever.
 
Yes, but wait to you hear them squawk at the rising cost for the military benefits when they have to pay for married homosexuals.

Also, if they remove DADT and do not recognize marriages from their HOR, giving the service member all benefits of married members, than you will see a court case at the Supreme level within the first few days. Imagine the upheaval that will cause! Which goes back to the basis of the problem, how do you give them only some rights? You would have to give all rights, but than that causes a problem for those that do not have the priviledge from their HOR. It is not like you can just say, I am a resident of NH because I got married there when your HOR does not recognize your union.

Obama has to make the real hard decision and take a stance on homosexual unions, the military should not be the test run for social programs. That is not the reason they exist.
 
but you promised!! **** or get off the pot. Someone has always tried to make the military the petri dish for social experiments.
 
They never gave him enough credit for the credit of his convictions.

Harry Truman = Battle of the Argonne, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Greece 1947 , integration of the military & MacArthur 1951. "The Buck Stops Here"
 
Last edited:
The federal DOMA will likely be struck down by the SCOTUS sooner or later. There are several constitutional issues with it, and they would be fairly easy to argue.

I'm not expecting any fast movement from that angle or DADT...
Political speaches don't have much practical value...
 
If DOMA being LEX TERRAE for more than X years with obvious constitutional flaws why hasn't USDOJ and the AG asked the SG to present a WRIT OF CERTIORARI to SCOTUS under ORIGINAL JURISDICTION? :wow:

This is a joke. Don't get your tighty whiteys in a knot.
 
Last edited:
Obfuscation to the extreme. Sort of like a Health Care Bill:shake:
 
The same way the DC handgun ban stood for decades or portions of the Patriot Act stood for years...
 
Those cases were heard or will be heard on appeal after a long involved process. Certain recent state laws are in direct contridiction to the DOMA. It is my understanding they don't need an appeal to consider. Solicitor General can request review and it is usually granted.
 
would a gay male on a sub have berthing with the female sailors or male sailors? Just keep in mind sexual harassment guidelines.:confused::confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top