We refered to these people as “barracks rats”. They spent their time off-duty drinking at the barracks and going nowhere fast. These same people would complain about being passed over for promotion and claiming it was for reasons other than them being lazy and useless.

There will always be people who are against any changes at wll whatsoever. I do believe that the number of people who would be against allowing gays to serve openly has decreased dramatically over the past 10 years.

Nobody has done a complete survey of serving military to see what they think. It’s always people who aren’t actively in the military who make claims about what the serving military would accept, both pro and con.

Comment by SGT Higgins — June 28, 2007 @ 11:03 am

Nahhh.

You’re not giving them enough credit.

They can’t all be inbreds.

Which was a BIG DEAL in the 1860’s…..and although they were not OFFICIALLY integrated, blacks (at least in the US Army, not the CSA) did often serve side-by-side with white Soldiers. It wasa big deal, and a MAJOR step. It just bogged down for another 100 years.

I do know that black people were allowed in the military, but there was segregation in the ranks. Black service members had their own units and were not integrated until it was enforced by congress during WW-II.

Wow! I wasn’t aware that the Army had instituted racial integration in the 1800’s! I guess this report was a complete lie, and that the military has been racially integrated before 1943.

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/historyonline/integrating.cfm

“It was not until the Civil War that African Americans were required to fight in racially separate units. In 1869, Congress made racial separation in the military official government policy.”

“It was during World War II that the policy of racial segregation within the military began to break down under pressure from African American leaders, who pointed out the contradiction of a country fighting Nazi racism having a segregated military. In March 1943, the War Department ordered the desegregation of recreational facilities at military facilities. In mid-1944, the War Department ordered all buses to be operated in a non-discriminatory fashion.”

I fully understand why you believe that racial segregation was enforced by the service members of the military. It’s hard to think of today’s military members being racially motivated, but they were.

When I served in the Army, there was only one person who had a problem with my sexuality. This was out of the hundreds of people that new. And this one person wasn’t even my roommate! Not one of my roommates had any problem with me being gay.

Sorry to shoot down your assumption that the 515 military members would overwhelmingly disapprove of openly gay service members. unless, of course, you pick & choose particular people that will vote the way you want them to vote.

79% ?? That IS astonishing, I wonder what that % would be if you asked 515 Servicemembers.
Of course, if we’re allowing 515 people to represent us all, well maybe we should take a look at the House and Senate and see where that’s gotten us before. LOL

England did not put this to a vote to the miliraty service members when they opened service to openly gay people. It was a policy decision that was enacted by the government, and it’s worked just fine. It was also the correct decision to make, and I hope that the US grows up and allows equal service by gay people. I would have stayed in the Army had this not been an issue.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that I found the women I served with to be mostly a great bunch, and we respected each other. I’m sure there were some closet lesbians I served with, but I was never groped, harrassed, or molested in any way by another woman. Pity I can’t say the same for some of the heterosexual men I served with.

Allowing all qualified people to serve regardless of their sexual orientation has always been the right thing to do. It’s about time.

Sorry.

Better luck next time!!!

Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES — June 28, 2007 @ 12:18 am

That was a most impressive display of an attack on the substance of my post. I am nearly blinded by your skill at dissecting my post with your tremendous verbal acumen and wit. Why, you didn’t even have to bring to bear a single argument. Nary a neuron was fired to dismantle my entire argument.

For lo, didst ad hominem attacks flow, and the blood of thine enemies didst spill, for thy blade was sharp, and thy tongue sharper still. Yea, doth a lack of substance, wit, linguisitc skill, and simple logic win all debate. For verily, IOKIYAR. A-men!

Of course, that’s been the core of the Repub. party for years now, distract the fools from the issues that really affect them

Comment by PaminBB — June 27, 2007 @ 11:37 pm

I’m not a Republican and have no problems with this view. As the original post said, 79% of Americans pretty much agree on this. Why we have to spend any time considering the opinions of the right wing religio fringe wackjobs majes no sense. This crap is affecting all of us negatively, at home and abroad, by difusing energy from real issues.

Of course, that’s been the core of the Repub. party for years now, distract the fools from the issues that really affect them

Comment by PaminBB — June 27, 2007 @ 11:37 pm

Bares repeating…Thank you for articulating what I could not.

Comment by Moderation — June 28, 2007 @ 12:07 am

PiPpy… CT… TP… JOOOOoooOOOOOoooos… Conspiracy!!!!