Obama sends handwritten letter to gay soldier ousted from the military promising to repeal DADT.
Obama sends handwritten letter to gay soldier ousted from the military promising to repeal DADT.
In January, Sandy Tsao, an army officer based out of St. Louis, MO, told her superiors that she is gay — a violation of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law. Tsao then wrote to President Obama, urging him to change the DADT policy: “I do hope, Mr. President, that you will help us to win the war against prejudice.” On May 5, Tsao received a handwritten letter from Obama with a pledge to repeal DADT at some point:
In the letter, Obama wrote that he is “committed to changing our current policy” but that “it will take some time to complete (partly because it needs Congressional action).” Yesterday, Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA), who has sponsored legislation repealing DADT, discussed the issue with Rachel Maddow, saying, “I’d like to see us move it by this summer, and I think we can.”
(HT: Windy City Times)
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
now THIS is change I can believe in!!! :)
it’s little things like this, among other things, of course, that make Barack Obama SO MUCH better a president than the moron and backward thinker who preceded him….
May 8th, 2009 at 9:54 amMr. President, you just need to let Congress know that this is a high priority for you, and it will get done. It’s not that complicated.
Do it now, Sir. Thank you.
PEACE
May 8th, 2009 at 9:54 amBy personalizing the issue, President Obama has moved this from ‘teh GAYS in teh military!’ to about people who want to serve the country. It’s a huge first step in getting the Congress and the Military to realize that this isn’t the hot button issue that the right wing would have them believe it is.
May 8th, 2009 at 9:56 amSorry, kali90, but a sternly worded letter is NOT change.
I do not understand why the Commander-in-Chief can’t simply order the entire military establishment, which he outranks, to accept gay soldiers.
The rest of the world is ahead of us. Israel, most EU nations, et al, allow openly gay men and women to serve. When will we, President Obama?
Even Barney Frank, as reported in this blog, has given up until ‘next year’. Maybe this sad story will either give Obama the opportunity he claims he needs or a push.
I’m sick of waiting for sad stories to push policy. I want leadership. I am not seeing that from President Obama; I see RE-action and not enough ACTION.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:05 amI was very deeply moved by the gesture. He sent her more than just words; he sent her something heartfelt. I can imagine it may take longer than one hopes to abolish prejudice in the military as it currently exists, but such actions as these make me hopeful.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:06 amWow. A leader of our country who not only cares, but actually listens and responds to it’s people!
May 8th, 2009 at 10:11 amThat said, I find it interesting that some people think that “change” is just a quick stroke of the pen, and it’s done in a matter of seconds.
Unfortunately, that’s not how it works in our capital.
I wrote Obama an e-mail about this subject this morning.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:15 amLet’s just repeal, “don’t ask, don’t tell.” It is the right thing to do for the country, and certainly the best thing to do for gay people.
#4 and 8 — If only it WERE that easy. Problem is it is now a federal law. It can only be repealed by Congress. Good luck with that. I hope it will be repealed with the gNOpe party.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:20 amPlease do it. We need to view talent over sexual identity and preference in our armed forces. Repeal this policy.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:30 amRep. Joe Sestak stated the issue very well on Rachel Maddow’s show. He noted that we’ve suffered eight years of executive orders to circumvent laws and that “we” (Democrats) need to make changes in a lawful and orderly manner. President Obama is not supposed to be making or unmaking laws – that’s the power granted to Congress – but is supposed to be ensuring that laws are carried out. That said, Congress could make the change very quickly IF cloture in the Senate can be accomplished.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:31 amCFP, I don’t know why you’re worried, you wouldn’t serve anyway, so it really doesn’t matter that you’re gay.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:31 amConservativeForProgress, please point out in the Constitution where the Commander In Chief has legislative powers. Dolt.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:33 amDo you think Senate Republicans would vote for cloture to allow an up-or-down vote on repeal of DOMA? Dolt.
The image of that letter is suitable for framing. The President of the United States pledging to fulfill a promise in writing.
That is integrity! (Something you right-wingers wouldn’t understand).
May 8th, 2009 at 10:36 amlarkohio Says:
I wrote Obama an e-mail about this subject this morning.
Let’s just repeal, “don’t ask, don’t tell.” It is the right thing to do for the country, and certainly the best thing to do for gay people.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:15 am
__________
It’s not just a matter of repealing DADT. Simply repealing the law brings us back to 1992 and bans homosexuals from serving altogether. Changing the policy involves a careful rewriting of lots of lines of U.S. code so that there won’t be any unclosed loopholes that allow discrimination. It’s not something that can be changed by Executive Order – it has to go through Congress, which is a slow and deliberative body by design.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:38 amHelen Rainier Says:
#4 and 8 — If only it WERE that easy. Problem is it is now a federal law. It can only be repealed by Congress. Good luck with that. I hope it will be repealed with the gNOpe party.
Here’s an idea, he do one of those signing statement thingys that bush liked to use saying that teh gays are ok in the military and we should stop enforcing the law. Like bush did with torture, indefinite detention, kidnapping, warrentless wiretapping, sodomy in public restrooms (for republicans) etc.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:40 amI don’t like it when a ‘progressive’ calls ConservativeforProgress a dolt. Give me a break, guys. This person is not RealityCheck. I’ve yet to see him insult anyone like you did right here.
ConservativeforProgress makes fairly intelligent points. If I missed him acting like a troll, then good for him–and I will stand corrected. Until then…lighten up and live and let live.
That’s what progressives do.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:42 am“… one of those signing statement thingys that bush liked to use…”
You took the words right out of my mouth.
There are MILLIONS of laws on the books. There are MILLIONS of laws being ignored, because they’re long out of date, or completely irrelevant in 2009.
Homosexuality is not a crime. Even military personnel have the right to free speech, especially this. This law is probably completely unconstitutional. Congress can repeal it, and so can the courts.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:45 amYou must have missed it Daddy-O.
But even so, I think the urge to ridicule the ridiculous should not be suppressed.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:45 amIt would be better for the country as a whole if we can move past the social wedge issues that take our focus off of the economic issues that have been under our noses forever; i.e. the concerted effort to destroy the unions, working class rights, living wages, etc.,
The private life battle has mesmerized the country into ignoring the public life battle to our collective detriment.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:46 amI hate the phony DADT bullshit.
It’s a strange thing. When I was in the service Of course I knew there would be gays in the military, so freakin what.
There were also psychos, people that could have been sent to jail instead they joined the Service, ho’s, racist jerks, and things I can’t explain. But they were welcomed into the military and these folks didn’t mind bragging about their situation. This is straight up discrimination.
If people would get the f0uck out of people’s beds the world would be better off.
STOP THE BULLSHIT!
May 8th, 2009 at 10:48 ama0d7fzz Says:
The image of that letter is suitable for framing. The President of the United States pledging to fulfill a promise in writing.
That is integrity! (Something you right-wingers wouldn’t understand).
THANK YOU!
Just think how much that letter will be worth in the future.
May 8th, 2009 at 10:59 amAlthough it might be done quickly, it would still require some political capital be spent to get it done. I do believe that he will work to get it done.
As the wicked witch of the west said:
May 8th, 2009 at 11:00 am“This must be handled delicately.”
Agreed. This letter is a stroke of political brilliance. It’s a great way to get it in the newscycle and makes it hard to guffaw at.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:02 amDaddy-O Says:
I don’t like it when a ‘progressive’ calls ConservativeforProgress a dolt. Give me a break, guys. This person is not RealityCheck. I’ve yet to see him insult anyone like you did right here.
ConservativeforProgress makes fairly intelligent points. If I missed him acting like a troll, then good for him–and I will stand corrected. Until then…lighten up and live and let live.
That’s what progressives do.
How in the hell can you tell progressives has to behave? We aren’t teabaggers.
That troll start the shit, you need to read before you post.
You sound like israel, “I’ll apologized later” instead of getting facts then talking your shit about progressives.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:10 amOne thing’s for sure: With this letter, Obama has committed himself more surely than his campaign promise. If he doesn’t follow through now, he’s in serious trouble politically speaking.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:13 amWhy does it need Congressional action? It’s a military disciplinary policy under the vestiges of a Commander in Chief. The military is free to change it without Congressional action. The brass is obviously against change.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:21 amA progressive blog would outline the minimum steps necessary to stop DADT. I think TP did that a month or so ago. How does Congressional approval fit into that effort?
May 8th, 2009 at 11:22 amIs it poor form to make public a personal letter like that?
May 8th, 2009 at 11:25 amGame of Life Says:
If people would get the f0uck out of people’s beds the world would be better off.
… although the beds would be far less fun with no f***ing in them.
/sorry, couldn’t help myself.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:42 amThe sooner, the better, Barack.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:48 amIf Obama did this “off the books” as a “Signing Statement” on an unrelated bill, etc. he would:
1) Lower Himself and the USA to making the Bush Cabal SOP the accepted SOP of the land.
2) Open up the possibility that Presidential Fiat will, in perpetuity, become the way of doing things
3) Leave it easy for the next administration to go back to the old ways, including DADT.
By doing it the hard way, he is showing class and also following up on his pledge to bring a new way into doing government.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:49 amGood work Mr. President…I’m so proud of you. You’ve taken on a herculean task, one that’s never been given to any other President. The last regime almost strangled our desire to live in our own country.
I also pray that we as a nation can sanction the rights of any individual that wants marriage. It is a holy state, not to be entered into without thought. Let us hope for a better future. We can’t always look back at how crazy we were. But we can hope that we can become better.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:55 amIn other words, if it can get through Congress, President Obama will sign it.
Sound’s like another budget reconciliation issue coming up….
May 8th, 2009 at 12:23 pmGates kicks the can down the road. Over 1,000 retired military leaders send a letter to Obama how eliminating DADT will harm the military.
This morning on Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace asked Secretary of Defense Robert Gates why there is “currently money in the 2010 budget” to keep enforcing the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy, given President’s Obama’s stated commitment to overturn it. Gates responded by noting that DADT is still “the law” and suggesting that changing that law would not be happening in the near term:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/29/gates-dadt-will-wait/
I said this a month ago and stand by it:
How hard is it to rescind a disciplinary policy? There is nothing to replace it with.
May 8th, 2009 at 12:26 pmCiting the Unitary Executive as a reason for not repealling DADT doesn’t make sense. The power of the pen struck down torture. Congress didn’t do squat and no court ever weighed in.
Obama has the power to repeal it and hasn’t.
May 8th, 2009 at 12:29 pmDr. Hussein Matt Says:
bigeugene Says:
Is it poor form to make public a personal letter like that?
According to who?
I was asking a serious question, not being snarky, thank you very much. Do a lot of people make public the contents of handwritten presidential letters?
I realize any Prez should view anything he writes as potentially public, I was just curious.
May 8th, 2009 at 1:37 pmStop acting like a 3 year old who can’t possibly wait two seconds without peeing your pants.
Obama is an elected official, not the King. He cannot wave a magic pen and demand that something be done.
May 8th, 2009 at 1:38 pmIf you just repeal DADT, then you go back to when it was illegal to be gay at all in the military. If you do this the right way (which might take a modicum of time, say a few months), then you will make sure that there are no unintended consequences from the law. Please recall that obama has been in office a matter of weeks, not years.
oh, and Spencer’smom–
PEACE
May 8th, 2009 at 1:39 pmWell done, sir. A deeply moving gesture. I have no doubt that he’ll change this disgusting law.
May 8th, 2009 at 1:48 pmYesterday Sullivan wrote Obama persecuted his first gay soldier.
May 8th, 2009 at 2:03 pmPerhaps he’ll temper his judgment a bit after this makes the rounds.
Wow, what I wouldn’t give to have a hand-written personal note from our President. What a delicious delight he is.
May 8th, 2009 at 2:15 pmSullivan, unfortunately is a knee jerk reactionist most of the time. I kind of feel for him because of that (I am a bit of one too), but you’d think he’d wait before jumping the gun. This is not Obama’s fault and he just can’t go in and change laws just by saying so and Sullivan knows that.
May 8th, 2009 at 2:19 pmSome members of Congress could hold up all his appointments.
I don’t think this summer is too far away. I definitely don’t want to see him use signing statements. This really doesn’t compare to stopping torture. He needs to get military leaders behind him so that he can ensure that the military will indeed work toward making sure that openly gay soldiers are safe and unhindered in their work. By getting Congress to pass legislation, it will be harder to reverse—unless the next president uses a signing statement.
President Obama is a pragmatist and he is very patient. I trust that he is committed to making gays welcome in the military and that he is going about it in an intelligent, and timely (by D.C. standards) manner. I voted for him as the lesser of two evils and had low expectations. Over time, I’ve been truly impressed with him.
May 8th, 2009 at 2:36 pmIsn’t it cool that you can write a letter to the president of the United States and get a handwritten reply?
May 8th, 2009 at 2:46 pmThere’s a good reason to not repeal DADT by executive fiat. It’s simply that having Congress act it protects the military from the next neanderthal dolt President from reversing field yet again and re-enacting DADT or even something more draconian.
Those who rightly point out that we’ve suffered enough under executive fiat and a President who thought he was king need to remember that present injustice undone by way of presidential whim, rather than due process, are inadvertently allowing for the future abuse of power.
We shall wait, and we shall win lasting victory on this issue.
May 8th, 2009 at 2:50 pmGood work, President Obama. I notice that he signed the letter ” Barack Obama” and not President Obama. This shows that he treated Sandy Tsao like a friend. We wouldn’t have never heard the former clown President Bush write a letter like that or even send a letter to a gay soldier. Obama has a large plate of issues and concerns that we all want for him to focus on. As Rep. Joe Sestak said, it my hope that the DADT issue is move to Congress to deal with this by summer.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:15 pmWith all those illegal occupations, wasteful military bases and wasteful military expenditures draining the US’s economy… they better start accepting Gays, underachieving students and unemployed poeple and poeple with hepatite.
(ps. I am not anti-gay at all, just pointing out that the military is in no position to be picky!)
May 8th, 2009 at 3:31 pmWow! for all those who somehow thinks the Prez of the USA can just go & tell congress what he wants done & get it in 5 minutes well you are delusional,this is not a dictatorship geecriminy!And moreover,we have soldiers serving in 2 wars where any knee jerk reaction can cause serious harm to the country.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:42 pmBut most disappointing is Rachel Maddow of MSNBC who is pushing the farce that somehow the Prez of the USA is not truly concerned about changing this ridiculous policy,Don’t ask don’t tell.Look how the stimulus bill got watered down ,it was not the bill the Prez wanted but had to accept the fact that the congress has a different view of how things should be done.Obama can’t just change policy that has been in effect many years by pressing a button folks.
That’s some fine politicking right there. Revolutionary and yet simple, small and obvious at the same time.
May 8th, 2009 at 3:53 pmIn defense of some of those who have stated they wish the President would get the ball moving a little faster, we all need to recall that in fact a President can request legislation on a topic from Congress. You will remember that this is exactly what he did with the the stimulus bill – requested a bill, and they wrote, voted on, and delivered one.
However, I agree 100% that this should indeed be a Congressional act, and not executive fiat. Observing proper procedure not only ensures that it is done correctly and legally, but also ensures that it can’t be easily overturned. Although, I would also support rejection of the policy by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional, because I believe that it is.
May 8th, 2009 at 4:04 pmSestak just took a big step forward, in my view, against Sen. “Caucus of Convenience” Specter.
May 8th, 2009 at 4:34 pmWhy are we giving the gays a voice…its like saying I’m being being discriminated against because I don’t like ham sandwiches..sexuality is not a group or a character trait…It should not be brought up for ANY matter of legal repercussion. If someone kills someone because he does not like the way his sexuality is then it should be murder…not hate crime or discrimination…Killing a someone because the person is gay is the same as killing a person that is brown eyed or short or tall…same with the military…it is BEST to NOT ask and NOT tell…because it is a mtter of opinion and not a matter of one group or another ….liberal idiots
May 8th, 2009 at 5:15 pmJust what we need, a bunch of distractions because the real men don’t want to shower with a bunch of meat gazers! If I was a Post Man and was delivering this letter, I’d wipe my A#$ with it!! Go Army!
May 8th, 2009 at 6:21 pmArine99, It is not that homosexuals want a voice.It’s that they want everyone to accept them for their perverted life style. They want marriage redefined. They are on an agenda to change centuries of beliefs just so they can have sex. I will tell you that if the military changes their policies you will have no army left. Many will not join and many will leave but that is part of it. To destroy are military and the institution of marriage between a man and a woman..Semper Fi
May 8th, 2009 at 6:45 pmI do not believe man is part of nature any more, But a maker of his on nature and by doing so is responsible for his evolution. The question is what will we evolve to be or will we survive the paths we elect to evolve by. I see homosexuality as a player in our evolution and a dangerous one, one mankind may not survive, but what do I care of mankind I will not know or what the purpose of life is. I believe murder, rape, child molests and homosexuality is wrong, and a no winners in the evolution game.
Are we still in the business of thinking what is right or are we evolving the easy way?
May 8th, 2009 at 6:58 pmSo what does this mean? Simply to allow the declaration that one is gay? Who cares? We all know that gays are in the military. The questions I have will public displays of affection be allowed? When I’m in basic, can I kiss my lover in the shower? Can I go with my lover anywhere with our arms around each other? Can I go on the make at the enlisted man’s club and try to find a hook-up? What changes other than being allowed to state that I am guy will take place? Help me understand.
May 8th, 2009 at 7:27 pmWhen I was a kid, gay meant happy, joyus, excited. Somewhere along the line, it became the word used to describe queers, homos, lesbians, deviants, etc. In other words, change the descriptor to a innocent sounding word to sanitize it.
Now, in the US Armed Forces, where a homo would be in homo heaven, the recruters and officers are banned by law from asking “are you a homo?” If the homo slips up and says “yes” they will be disciplined.
We are only fooling no one…………except maybe a 6 year old. In my days at boot camp, if a guy was gay, and tried to mount me, he did not live to the next day. Period. Sudden Death Syndrome in the shower. “hey sarge, pretty boy fell and hit his head”
I suggest we have an all homo branch of the services….homo marines, homo air force, homo army, and homo special forces. In this way, they can do each other all the time without asking or telling. They would have pink uniforms, pink tanks and jeeps, guns that shot urine, and hand grenades filled with $#@*^.
And OBAMA, as commander in chief of the USHOMO FORCES, would now be happy, as we all know he is a homo too. It is obvious he married his absent father ( his now wife, a transexual named Mike)
So, in closing, I too support ending dont ask dont tell, if it will be replaced by USHOMO FORCES.
May 8th, 2009 at 7:28 pmPeople don’t seem to realize how our military is constitutionally controlled. The President is Commander In Chief, but this only means he commands the troops in battle. He has no operational command over miltary policies, operational structure, composition, armaments, etc. He’s not some kind of absolute military dictator, precisely because the framers of the Constitution were gravely concerned about the consequences of that. So all the operational and policy issues governing the military are actually under the control of congress, and not the President. So Obama does not actually have the power to fully change the policies about gays in the military without congressional support. It’s not his personal miltiary, to do with as he likes, it’s the military of the people of the United States, and thus is is controlled by the people’s representatives in Congress.
May 8th, 2009 at 8:08 pmNew batch of sniveling trolls, I see.
May 8th, 2009 at 8:18 pmJAQUEBAUER 63 and conradg 64 say it too well, now if these 2 send a letter to the Pre to leave the DADT as is will they get a simular response to withhold what is already in the DADT? maybe what JAQUEBAUER 63 suggestion will work he said (above) Quote ” I suggest we have an all homo branch of the services….homo marines, homo air force, homo army, and homo special forces. In this way, they can do each other all the time without asking or telling. They would have pink uniforms, pink tanks and jeeps, guns that shot urine, and hand grenades filled with $#@*^”.
May 8th, 2009 at 8:42 pmThanks pdizil, John Adams, nebularken and ILVMTRK, looks like DADT has a chance live.
May 8th, 2009 at 8:48 pmThese new trolls sound like guys who have sex with gay prostitutes then beat them up.
May 8th, 2009 at 9:49 pmBush slid past getting legislation passed by adding signing statements to a LOT of bills that came across his desk.
Signing statements were designed to allow a president to declare holidays or special days or things like that bypassing the house and the senate… Reagan did a few, Bush Sr. did a few, Bush Jr. actually did more than anyone else combined passing laws/rules that even stated in the suffixes that he did NOT have to follow the law or rule he wrote if he did not feel it necessary… talk about a liar and bamboozler … there are still idiots that think he was a great president… I choke thinking his cronies gave him 100 million dollars in 100 days for his presidential library… he a Cheney should be brought up on treason, lying and the RICO act… Karl Rove and his cronies as well… heck ALL the previous administration including that lying opportunist Rumsfeld…
May 8th, 2009 at 10:44 pmShe knew when she went to the brass and told them she was gay they would have no other choice but put her sorry a*s out. So no she wants to act like she was screwed over. I am in the military I definetly dont want of openly gay serving with me in combat making a mockery of the uniform. First Barrack has never put a uniform so he does not even have clue. If you take a poll of the military and I bet I am in the majority. You need to keep that crap in the closet because I don’t want see that pantsy behavior while on duty.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:11 pmHey JAQUEBAUER 63 –
May 8th, 2009 at 11:13 pmFirst of all – Jack in French is spelled Jacques
Second of all – homophobes like you are so effeminate – it is a HUGE turn-off. Women like men who are comfortable and confident in their own skin – men like Barack Obama. Insecure braggarts are just so passe. ewww.
Ok – I agree – send only gays in the military and send them all to Iraq
May 8th, 2009 at 11:15 pmIf a homosexual couple moved into your neighborhood, do you have the right to kick them out based solely on their orientation?
Thirty-one of the fifty states and the District of Columbia have some sort of law that at least prohibits state-level discrimination against sexual orientation. The Armed Forces represent just another workplace.
You’re in the Armed Forces to protect the nation and its interests. Focus on that instead of worrying about what ‘the gay’ will do to you. In fact, you’re supposed to be the bravest men and women we’ve got. Grow a spine.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:16 pmIt seems many of the posters are blaming Bush for the DADT policy when it was Clinton that signed it into law.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:31 pmShe knew when she went to the brass and told them she was gay they would have no other choice but put her sorry a*s out. So no she wants to act like she was screwed over. I am in the military I definetly dont want of openly gay serving with me in combat making a mockery of the uniform. First Barrack has never put a uniform so he does not even have clue. If you take a poll of the military and I bet I am in the majority. You need to keep that crap in the closet because I don’t want see that pantsy behavior while on duty.
Whose military are you a member of? The American military has literacy standards, last I heard.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:31 pmThis is really awesome! And this is why the world and Americans love this president. I hope Obama repeals the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy that homophobic right wing Republicans like Clinton and Bush Co. have imposed on homosexuals.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:33 pmNot the Army. When I was in the Air Force–78-82—the literacy rate in the Army was 60%. A lot of their manuals were in comic book formats. While I was stationed on an Army post, I had to pull door duty in the chow hall. The guy working with me was army. He tried to talk me into taking the til after I pointed out to him that he had just given an officer his twenty dollars back + the price of his lunch. I tried to teach him how to count change, and he simply could not get it. It struck me that the military really did take care of a lot of people and it was better that a lot of them weren’t on their own in the general population.
In the case that gays are able to serve openly in the military and non-discrimination is enforced, most of these loud-mouths will shut and up and do what they’re told.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:42 pmThe United States military is the only thing holding this nation together. Are we going to fxxx that up too?
May 8th, 2009 at 11:49 pmBeing a vetern myself I belive the DADT policy should remain as is. I dont feel I’m anti-gay however I remember having to be naked many times in front of other soldiers in the showers and for group physicals and if I knew there was gay soldiers in the group it would make everyone else very uncomfortable. I would gladly work side by side with someone thats gay, but i dont want to be naked with them. So DADT is a good policy, the non-gay soldiers have rights too.
May 8th, 2009 at 11:58 pmI’m not against homosexuals, but if a man and woman cant shower together in the army, marines, air force, navy etc. then why should a man that views another man as a sexual desire be able to shower with a man? if gay men or women can join the forces, then they should be in seperate baracks. I am sorry to say that if a homosexual man or woman can share baracks with the same sex, then a heterosexual man and woman should be able too, and I am sure that you can see the conflict, and possibly understand why this “rule” was placed, it’s not a matter of descrimination, yet morality… would you feel safe being “safeguarded” by somebody with only that concern, or by people busy fratinizing?! man+woman = NO! so then man+man = NO! and woman+woman = NO! so please understand it’s not putting down gay men and women, it’s simply about rules and regulations
May 9th, 2009 at 12:17 amI see a lot of people posting. Their remarks tell me they have never served. Having served, I can say it would be difficult to equally represent all sexuality preferences. Yes, SEXUALITY, this is what we are talking about. If we allow gays top openly profess homosexuality, then we must by the same token take away all other forms of privacy like clothing and gender based laws. I have gay friends, and knowing their gay has meaning to me and it should be respected. I don’t think this should keep them from securing employment, but when that employment means I have to share close quarters with them, I now have no choice. Why should you take my choice and give it to a very small minority of the population. Ask women if they want men and women to walk around naked all day? If they say cool, then I’m all for it. If they say no, then I say respect that. Why am I fort it, I’m a guy who likes women and I love to look at naked women. Tell me a gay person does not feel the same way. I can tell you my gay friends say all the time how cool it is to be gay and have access that non-gays don’t. Don’t give me crap about their bad, or their wrong, or their not normal, they are just like you and I, and this is why we separate the sexes, for privacy reasons. men and women have separate bathrooms, lets save money and have one bath room. Hey, the already do that, but they are meant for one person at a time. lets make them common, and common showers too. Let start this in high school, so when their ready to join the military its normal behavior for them by that time. may be we would have less rape. No, this wont work, rape is about power, not sex. Then why change the law, it s about power, not sex, HELLO!!! It should not be a crime to be gay, it should be crime to lie. You lie, I can’t trust you, hence no military service. If you have not served, respect the fact that you can’t understand.
You want to talk about the rest of the world, fine, go live in the rest of the world, and leave this one to me.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:29 amPlease do not assume that servicemembers (which I include myself among) are “right-wing” or “homophobic”.
As for comparing this to discrimination such as being able to decide if your gay neighbors can be forced to move, this is a ridiculous analogy. You don’t have to shower with your neighbors, but you do have to shower with 70-80 men in one room. It would not be a positive development for gays to openly serve.
I respect ALL who choose to serve. That does not mean I want to be forced to shower with a homosexual. Not knowing that someone might be gay and in my presence is tolerable and they still get to serve. For unit morale, I would much rather preserve DADT.
As for Sandy Tsao—disgraceful to come out, especially as an OFFICER. She knew the rules and yet she has no integrity. It is not like she was not gay when she joined.
TO ALL OF YOU WHO ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE POLICY, BUT NEVER SERVED, please be quiet. You don’t have a right to say a word about it! (Shut your pie hole or ENLIST!).
And right on to “A” who pointed out DADT was a CLINTON POLICY!! WOW! So many of you hate Bush and Republicans–it’s really sad!
May 9th, 2009 at 12:38 amI’ve served. Lots of people here have served. For some people group showers are difficult even if they assume everyone is straight. So what? You get over it.
Rape, btw, is a serious problem for women in the military, in spite of the separate shower quarters. The problem is a lack of discipline.
Recruitment has been so low that criminals are being allowed in the military. I’d rather have more non-criminal gays serving openly and no gang-bangers or white supremists.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:40 amI agree with these folks…Obama is killing our economy…why not go ahead and kill the morale of the military too?
May 9th, 2009 at 12:43 amTo Daddy-O: Active-duty personnel do NOT have the Freedom of Speech. If you had served you would know this.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:44 amIf I could put up with having to tell almost every man I served with to stop talking to my tits, you guys can brave the f^cking showers. Really.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:44 amI for one am tired of being pushed around by a small minority of people. I believe don’t ask don’t tell is right for the military and should be the norm in all businesses. The difference is that I don’t believe sexuallity and sexual preferences have any right to be in the work place regardless if you gay or straight. So I say it should be DADT for ALL people straight people as well as gays. Work is for working and should not be a substitute pick-up joint.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:46 am“wiley Says: I’ve served. Lots of people here have served. For some people group showers are difficult even if they assume everyone is straight. So what? You get over it. Rape, btw, is a serious problem for women in the military, in spite of the separate shower quarters. The problem is a lack of discipline. ”
I agree. lets get to the point and make it all common showers and common services, You agree; THEY”LL GET OVER IT”. I’m all for it. I don’t mind some other guy staring at my wife or daughter in the shower., I am secure with the fact that I know my wife is coming home to me.
Wiley, Dude wake the F*&^ UP, have you lost your LITTLE mind!!!
May 9th, 2009 at 12:48 amOrion53 said:
What is Herculean about DADT? The deficit is Herculean. Waste, Fraud and Abuse is Herculean. DADT is not Herculean. It is a good policy, speaking as a Marine veteran. Gays cannot be discrimated against like other groups that have physical characteristics that have historically led to discrimation (like skin color for example).
I would never know if the Marine next to me was gay. He/She can’t be discrimated and sexual orientation HAS NO PLACE in the military…the military is a WARRIOR CULTURE, NOT A SOCIAL-ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT!
Repealing DADT would be a mistake for reasons I and others have stated.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:51 am“Wiley… If I could put up with having to tell almost every man I served with to stop talking to my tits, you guys can brave the f^cking showers. Really.”
I’m ready for the shower if you are! But your not and you will come up with some lame ass excuse whay its ok for gays to be there but not you and I. Come on, I’m 6′2″ 240lbs ex jarehead. Not as lean, but still as mean. See, its all about sex.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:53 amRead my post above. I have not lost my mind. Did I care if there were lesbians in the shower at boot camp? NO. For one thing, I didn’t look around the shower to see if any women were looking at me. I took a dam*ed shower!
Men have, for some strange reason, been standing beside each other at urinals with no dividing walls for a long time. And don’t most high school and other gyms have little privacy in the showers?
So somebody looks at you. SO WHAT. If someone is leering at you, you address that. Don’t assume that every gay man who looks your way wants you.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:55 amThose of us old enough to Bill Clinton’s unprepared, premature, and ultimately unsuccessful effort to allow homosexuals to serve in the military can sympathize with this administrations determination to prepare the ground and not get burned. Barney Frank (D-Mass) agrees that this year is not the year.
However, the recent discharge of the Arabic translator may be a catalyzing event and may have been undertaken in that way. As this man’s discharge makes its way through public opinion and possible the courts, the time is approaching when the issue will be addressed, correctly.
As for this letter, it is pure Obama and a wonderful thing.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:59 amI don’t get what point you’re trying to make, ex-jarhead.
link
May 9th, 2009 at 12:59 amWiley,
To be respectful. It’s about privacy. When was the last time you went to the mens room. Hell the women have more privacy then men, I ask, what are they afraid of, that they need all that space and stalls with walls, yet they take a friend to pee. Men don’t take friends to pee with them, it’s just not what we normaly do. So when are we going to shower and not look at one another?
May 9th, 2009 at 1:01 amThe commander tells you to go over the hill, you go over the hill. He tells you to shower with all members of your unit, even if they’re gay, you do so. Women would also be required to shower with gay women. So what? Being scared of the gay is pussy.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:07 amWile, “xenophobia” nice college girl I see. So do you prefer MLA or APA, I bet Chicago is your thing.
Any how, your talking about countries that have topless beaches and differing social norms; and don’t talk about what you don’t know. I’ll take your word on your perceptions, if you have been to those places you’ve listed, because I have and I know. I have trained with most of them as well. And while they allow mixing, they still separate like any click does. In fact, many of those you mentioned feel same sex is for pleasure and opposite sex for breading mostly, but that’s not U.S. culture.
Its all about privacy!!!! or its about sex and its no of anyone else’s business, especially not the government.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:11 am“wiley Says:
The commander tells you to go over the hill, you go over the hill. He tells you to shower with all members of your unit, even if they’re gay, you do so. Women would also be required to shower with gay women. So what? Being scared of the gay is pussy.”‘
Now I think your not military anymore, As a commander I would get fragged if I told my straits to shower with my gays. I would get fragged for having gays period. As you said I must follow orders and orders say I must discharge all gays. Good Order and Discipline are words that have escaped you some how. Try UCMJ and get back to me.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:16 amGetting rid of DADT would be a terrible mistake. Homosexuality is wrong and unnatural. This will end up being one of President Obama’s many mistakes during his hopefully one term. I am rooting for him though.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:19 amYeah, thnx. VEAP helped out with my college costs.
I worked with NATO troops, and I’m convinced that many of them have heterosexual sex for pleasure—they certainly pursue women for pleasure. Most NATO countries have gays serving openly. NO problem.
Part of not making a big deal out of sexuality and gender is not making a big deal out of it.
What?! I suspect you have confused things like men wearing eye shadow and other innocuous fashion issues with sexuality.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:19 amAll this talk about having gays in the shower is the same as having straight men taking a shower with women misses an important point. Gay guys have been taking showers with other guys ever since they were about 13 years old. I’m sure most straight guys have never taken a shower with a bunch of women in their lives. When you’re gay, you get over it; it’s not a big deal like it would be for straight men with women in the shower.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:21 amAnd, BTW, if you can’t face taking a shower in a room where there might be a gay guy, then how can you face enemy fire?
I am a veteran, and from the quality of your writing, I assume you don’t have to worry about being the commander.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:23 amAs a woman, I have never showered with a group of men, but I am beginning to wonder if they have cheap porn soundtracks playing in the background. Jiminy effing Cricket—it’s a SHOWER.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:26 amWiley,
You so very smart, I play nice and you get dirty. I see yu make fun me righting.
Privacy, privacy, privacy, is what this is about, and still we can’t seem to find the head of the nail. People will say anything to make a point and never take the time to hear what they said. When the time comes to live it, they back down. Make it all common and banish the gender based services.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:30 amYou just want an excuse to shower with a bunch of women.
If privacy is really your concern then you should be arguing against group showers, living in tents, etc.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:36 amMen worrying about gay men in the shower makes about as much sense to me as women worrying about their make-up in the field.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:39 amI suspect that for many of the posters here, this shower / privacy sh!t is just a red herring to cover up their only real reason that they support DADT – their homophobia. Seriously, are you all saying that your discomfort about taking a shower with a gay guy trumps the military’s need for qualified personnel and the costs of this policy?
NEED:
Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Shalikashvili (Ret.) and former Senator and Secretary of Defense William Cohen spoke against the policy publicly in early January 2007: “I now believe that if gay men and lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces,” General Shalikashvili wrote. “Our military has been stretched thin by our deployments in the Middle East, and we must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job.”
Ref: “A New Push to Roll Back ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’”. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/30/us/30military.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin.
COST:
May 9th, 2009 at 1:47 amIn February 2005, the Government Accountability Office released estimates on the cost of the policy. Cautioning that the amount may be too low, the GAO reported $95.4 million in recruiting costs and $95.1 million for training replacements for the 9,488 troops discharged from 1994 through 2003. In February 2006, a University of California Blue Ribbon Commission including Lawrence Korb, a former assistant defense secretary during the Reagan administration, former Defense Secretary William Perry, a member of the Clinton administration, and professors from West Point U.S. Military Academy concluded that figure should be closer to $363 million.
“Report: ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ costs $363M”. USA Today, Washington/Politics. 2006. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-02-14-dont-ask-report_x.htm.
Wiley,
I would love to shower with a bunch of women! HELLO! Ask for the VEAP money back, and next time take some books to school with you.
And I dare you to tell me gays don’t love showering with people of the same sex, what is your F*&$%^(* point.
I HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS THE ENTIRE F *&^(%$# TIME. ARE YOU HITTING THE PIPE AS YOU TYPE THIS CRAP.
Again your talking about cultural norms which is the same as talking about privacy and I was being sarcastic when I said eliminate gender services. That would be like doing away with affirmative action or the glass ceiling action and we can’t do that either; according to those MA fire fighters and women around the world.
Your talking about special treatment; you want more but you don’t want to risk that which you already have.
Damn it, just say it “strait”, your gay!!!!!!!!!! I can respect that.
What I don’t respect is this talk about equality. Average women can’t perform to the same physical standards as average men yet they think they know all about being equals.
Take a pill!
May 9th, 2009 at 1:53 am“RL999 Says:
I suspect that for many of the posters here, this shower / privacy sh!t is just a red herring to cover up their only real reason that they support DADT – their homophobia. Seriously, are you all saying that your discomfort about taking a shower with a gay guy trumps the military’s need for qualified personnel and the costs of this policy? ”
Wow a “Red Herring”, ever heard of a “Slippery Slope” shit head. If you take away one groups privacy, you must take away all privacy and privacy is already a rare commodity in the field. Why should you have the right to take away my privacy, yet, you get to keep yours?
Another F*&(^&% bean counter. WOW you can find other people ideas. The point is local, it’s in the heads of the people in the fight, not some Jack Ass at a computer talking about numbers. I don’t care what law you pass, it wont stop the little voice in their head. And just in case you forgot, we all have rights, not just the minority and since the majority make up most of the F&*^%$& military, I have to side with them or get fragged Jack Ass.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:02 amAnd if you had scored higher on your ASVABS you’d know that.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:03 amJRM — I guess that if the facts are inconvenient for you, you’ll just insult them instead of discussing them intelligently. What this indicates is that if the military didn’t have to expel thousands of qualified gay people, then they wouldn’t have to hire thousands of idiots who aren’t qualified.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:14 amI’m all about equality, but the weak complain and so we have laws to equalize. Having served with gays in the service, their sexuality only came into question when they did something else wrong and needed a distraction; however, they often failed to consider the true greater evil and got nailed for the more simple factor of being gay rather than what they really did wrong in the first place. Gay for convenience to a point. They signed up knowing it was not allowed and consented, until they did something else wrong. 1989 female Marine out-ed herself to the wrong female and during her investigation went on and on about she was sexually harassed by men down the hall in the men’s room telling of their sexual exploits the weekend prior and this some how turned her gay.
No bullshit real story. I was one of the Marines in the men’s room at the time and I was called on the carpet 9 years later to answer for this lady being gay. She tried to blame us for making her gay. Now, we all know it don’t work that way, but she would say anything to divert the attention from her UCMJ violation. I’m just saying “keep it in your pants” However, people are people and we can’t keep it in out pants, or so it seems.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:23 amRL999: I guess that if the facts are inconvenient for you, you’ll just insult them instead of discussing them intelligently.
My choice of dialog is mine and mine alone. I make no excuses for it. This forum deserves no better.
As for expelling “thousands of qualified gay people, and hiring thousands of idiots who aren’t qualified, I think if you read what you wrote, you’ll see it makes little sense in reality, so leave the drama at home.
On the grand scheme of things, what we have works and what some advocate may or may not work; either way, the suggested change can not be implemented until social norming has time to work. Hell, racism and sexual discrimination is still prevalent in the military, yet the posts here seem to convey its just a law that must change, get a grip.
This is not the rest of the world, yet most of the world want to be here, funny how that works. And when they get here, they want to change it to the way it is back home. Hello; Go home. Speak English or go home… Why do all these minorities deserve special treatment. Count those beans please. I gotta pic a language at the ATM, how crazy is that shit, and the alternative is Spanish. Why not Chinese or Korean? let me guess, the bean counter is going to try and justify this, but you can’t and be fair to all others.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:37 amOK let me get this right you people really think that the President should jump into the full on repeal of this DADT policy when the economy is still on a spiral and unemployment rates are still soaring.Aren’t these more important and by the way don’t forget the DADT was signed into law and pushed through by none other than then Demorcrate President Bill Clinton to win some reelection votes of the gay population.Also lets investigate the real issue why these people are all of a sudden poping out of the closet when they know its going to get them kicked out Were they soon getting orders to serve their country in its war on terror is it just becoming the easy way to dodge their responsibility of going to war.The reason that it has been a federal law making it illegal for gays to serve was mainly because until recently it was listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as being a mental disease. And most Gay people that I have and still are friends with does have a very unstable mental condition that when I served in the Army with an Infantry unit I wouldn’t have wanted to really on them to help whatch my back.Bottom line is lets get the economy back on track get people their jobs back then return to these issues after we have saved everyone as a majority and not get side tracked on an issue that really only affects a handful of American citizens.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:10 amIt saddens me how hypocritical and hateful Americans (some) tend to be about the simplest issues out there. Even issues that require little thinking seem to throw this country into long discussions that merely cover up one’s insecurity.
You complain about showering with gay men…have any of you realized you’ve been showering with them ALREADY and just don’t know it because of DADT? Men can never shower with women because men are more likely to overpower women. I’m sure a homosexual will not try anything besides LOOK because of the onslaught that would follow.
Think of it like this…gay men and women are similar. Do you think a woman would automatically be attracted to you? No, so stop being insecure and childish. Stop reading half the bible by being against homosexuality (right) and judging them (wrong). It is not our place to judge. The discrimination and negative views against homosexuality are SIMILAR to the discrimination and outlandish negative views against african-americans in the past.
But of course our constitution says all men are created equally. But of course our bible says all sins are equal in the eyes of our Lord. Grow up, educate yourself, and watch how America’s problems seem to disappear.
May 9th, 2009 at 4:28 amIt’s not that simple. Obama can’t order soldiers to rob a bank or the like. Why? Because it’s against the law. Bush got how into much trouble over questionable legal phrasing to justify troops committing acts of torture?
Laws exist for a reason, and I don’t want a country where a President can handwave those laws away. If DADT is to be ended, let it go through proper, legal channels. A proposal to repeal the section of legislation enforcing DADT needs to be written into law the same way DADT was. By Congressional vote, during a session of Conress.
From there, it needs to dodge all the pork that gets tacked on to bills. Let’s say, for example, a repeal on DADT was grouped in one piece of legislation with a section outlawing abortion, another supporting a raise for Congress, and a third repealing funding for battered spouse centers in the Western United States (yes, bills usually get packaged together, dozens at a time). Do you want to be known as the Congressman who voted against gays? Or the one who voted against battered women?
Why do you think there’s so much mud in elections? These guys aren’t stupid. The system is. Because of that? Any change takes time.
May 9th, 2009 at 5:12 amLooks like everyone that wants the DADT policy changed are missing the point. This article is about a lesibian, most soldiers could care aless about lesibians. There are a few things you just dont do. You dont walk into a bikers bar full of Hells Angels wearing Mongols color, you dont go to a country and westeren bar on a friday night and announce country music sucks and you sure dont walk into a barracks full of grunts and tell everyone your gay, Your going to get the crap kicked out of you. When a male soldier tells his commander hes gay his stuff is packed and hes moved out of the barracks in less then a hour and hes put somewhere else for the 2-4 weeks it take to discharge him. Its just the way it is.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:13 amDont come back at me a say the guys that beat him up will go to jail for it, You get a few beers into a macho soldier and he dont care about jail time, The DADT policy is there for his protection as much as for anything else. As far as the militarys of other countrys having a openly gay policy, i know they do, but the gays dont tell everyone or thier get the crap kicked out of them too. I was attached to the UN for 3 years and served with soldiers from many different countrys and have discussed this issue more then a few times with some of them. This is not going to change on our life time. If Obama gets this policy changed then he will be partly to blame for any gay bashing that will occur.
T-H-I-S I-S S-P-A-R-T-A !!!
…more important policy issues reign than revisiting DADT..but hey, make the mil gay, so straights don’t re-up, then let the ‘new mil’ fight in Afghanistan…sounds like a plan to me. Thanks, Sandy.
May 9th, 2009 at 7:16 amTo all you folks having orgasms over this note: speaking as someone who is gay, on the left (mosttly), has never voted for a Republican in his entire life, and wouldn’t watch Fox News if you put a gun to his head: you people are absolutely frickin’ pathetic. The country is becoming like North Korea with better restaurants. He’s smoother and better educated, but Obama is your basic Southside hack politician who sucked up to Dailey and Co. for years to get where he is today. He will do or say whatever he has to to get reelected and pay back those who make that possible (see: Chrysler bailout). You guys sound like you masturbate over his picture every night. Gotta, go, I’m trying to find a gay survivalist compound I can flee to.
May 9th, 2009 at 7:47 amMagoKui: “Men can never shower with women because men are more likely to overpower women.”
They do in the Norwegian military. I though we should model ourselves after the Europeans?
Actually, what I logged on to bring up is that it’s not just “repeal DADT”. As several people have pointed out, that would just leave the situation of homosexuality just being forbidden.
The Congress has the only authority to change law, and the law in question is the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The UCMJ prohibits military persons from a long list of activities, including sodomy (defined as an unnatural sexual act). Homosuexuals have been barred from the military because the defining characteristic of homosexuality is a propensity to commit such acts. Homosexuals have doubtless served in the military since the beginning by simply hiding that propensity. Gays didn’t like having to lie about their nature to serve, so (who else, Bill “depends on how you define intercourse” Clinton) set things up so they didn’t have to actually lie, just keep quiet and no one will ask.
I’m not advocating this, but to let homosexuals openly serve, the ban against sodomy would have to be lifted. While we’re at it some of those other things that invade our personal life preferences could be taken out, like the prohibitions against adultery, bestiality (oops, that’s part of the sodomy law), and having sex with children should go, too.
May 9th, 2009 at 8:04 amYou took the words right out of my mouth. You are right. I mean, come on. Whos to say we won’t have a republican next and they go and change things around again, and all that hard work Obama has done has just gone to waste. I believe the military has too strict standards on everything, and this DADT policy is stuck in the 50’s. Wake up people, we are in the 21st century, free speech and all that. So what if people are gay, that doesn’t stop them from doing their jobs right?
May 9th, 2009 at 8:52 amhave any of you actually served in the armed forces, probably not, therefor you would not know why this policy should be left in place. The armed services are an institution on thier own, it is different form normal society for a reason, it has different values beliefs and its own identity. The DADT policy allows many gay men and women to serve, all they have to do is not let people know they are gay. If they were to openly say they were gay in a mass non-gay military what do you think would happen, noone would want to bunk next to them, noone would want to share a foxhole in battle with them, they would be socially outcasted by others. In the armed services you keep personal things PERSONAL. Not everything is fair and the same as normal society as it should be. Like I said it is its own institution.
May 9th, 2009 at 9:24 amThe image of that letter is suitable for framing. The President of the United States pledging to fulfill a promise in writing.
That is integrity! (Something you right-wingers wouldn’t understand).
INTEGRITY????You have got to be kidding…it is just another lip service promise, like all his promises from his campaign.Talk is cheap. Obama doesn’t have an honest or moralistic bone in his body, nor is he capable of following through on anything that is not set up by someone else telling him what to do and then he screws that up. The sooner you people realize that you have been duped the better off America will be.I pray everyday that he will lose his position as POTUS before we are living in a U.S. that does not in anyway resemble the greatest nation in the world…a free nation.Now that his college records were ordered released and it shows him as a foreign student, he will eventually be removed from office and EVERYTHING that he has done as president will then be null and void.Biden for all his idiocy would be a far more superior president.Now how sad is that.
May 9th, 2009 at 9:37 amBetter open your eyes people, know the difference between right and wrong, I am a veteran and I think the president should stay out of this one. We all should understand that mans laws only apply to the short time we are here on earth and we each must decide what is moral and what is not, because man is not going to judge your eternal soul,
God will !
THESE ARE THE LAWS THE LORD SPOKE TO MOSES ON UNLAWFUL SEXUAL RELATIONS
LEV 18,
“22 Never have sexual intercourse with a man as with a woman. It is disgusting.”
24“Do not become unclean in any of these ways. By these practices all the nations which I am forcing out of your way have become unclean.
25 The land has become unclean. I will punish it for its sins. The land will vomit out those who live in it.
26 Live by my standards, and obey my rules. Neither you nor any foreigner should ever do any of these disgusting things.
27 The people of the land who were there before you did all these disgusting things. As a result, the land has become unclean.
28 If you make the land unclean, it will vomit you out
as it has vomited out the people who were there before you.
29 Whoever does any of these disgusting things must be excluded from the people.
30 So you must follow my instructions. Don’t live by the standards of the people who lived there before you. What they do is disgusting. Never become unclean that way. I am the LORD your God.”
We were given free will to make our own choices, and we are lucky to live in a country that gives us the freedom to choose our own lifestyles and not be persecuted for that choice. Whether you believe in these words or not, that is your choice. Ask yourself this one question though, what if it is true, and I have ignored the laws of God and lived a unclean and disgusting lifestyle ? How will you answer Him, when He sits in judgment of your eternal soul ?
I nor any other man can judge you on the choices you make, only He can do that.
So go on continue living your life by mans rules or your rules
and in the end you will know that you should have changed your ways, but then it will be too late, can you feel it getting warm in here !
One more thing before I close here, what if the president does change the law on gays in the military, and the orders are given and passed down the chain of command, and the soldiers are told that they must obey these orders. What happens to that openly gay Marine recruit at Parris Island, SC
at the end of the day after the lights are out, the soldiers have always had a way of handling these kinds of situations, I tell you one thing, I would not want to be in that recruits place.
I can say the things because I am an American citizen and just like you I have the freedom of speech and religion. If you don’t like what have to say, don’t read it, but WHAT IF I SPEAK THE TRUTH AND YOU IGNORE IT ?
May 9th, 2009 at 9:48 amMy husband is a 20 year veteran was severely injured in Iraq in Jan 2006 and we’ve been here at Walter Reed Army Medical Center ever since. We both strongly believe that ANY American – regardless of race, gender, religion, or sexual preference should be able to serve in the Armed Forces and hope to see this law changed. We are not Republicans nor are we Democrats – we vote purely on the issues, but we would like to add one thing. The difference between this handwritten note by our new Commander in Chief and the 15 to 20 handwritten letters I have in our filing cabinet from his predecessor is that President Bush NEVER looked for media attention when he did something personal for a soldier. After being asked, he promised my husband that he would run with him if he was ever able. Well, that simply wasn’t in the cards, his legs were too badly damaged so instead, President Bush rode bikes with him for an entire morning while my children and I were given a personal tour of the White House. You would NEVER see any of that on the news because he never cared what the American public thought of him. I know MANY different times he’s sent handwritten letters (we got a Christmas card EVERY year after my husband was injured) and he NEVER publicized it. Must be nice to have the media on your side……..
May 9th, 2009 at 10:01 amWith the sad state of our country, it is even sadder to think that an issue like this is even being discussed. Our new president has already doubled our entire national debt and is on his way to tripling it. Yet, we’re supposed to be concerned about an Army officer who willfully went against a known policy. It’s simple, if she wanted to stay in the military she should have kept her sexual orientation to herself. This looks like a way for her to get out of the Army, join a list of martyrs, and bring attention to herself. I wish people would care as much about our Constitution being ignored and twisted.
May 9th, 2009 at 10:26 amYou mean she broke the law but yet she gets a handwritten letter from POTUS?
I think speed limits are wrong. What do I get?
All the problems in this world and the money and effort being spent to give immoral gays special rights?
May 9th, 2009 at 11:14 amhahatohopeandchange – Yes, the military has its own values and norms. Any institution where murdering other human beings is not only tolerated, but glorified cannot help having different rules and morals. Why does it surprise anyone that someone in the military would suggest murdering a gay serviceman in the shower? These individuals have been taught that the proper way to solve disputes is to kill the opposing side. That’s why the alleged commander repeatedly mentions being fragged – for these people, murder is not only ok, it’s admirable! And yet, when the Department of Homeland Security suggests that such individuals could be dangerous when they are released back into the general public without the necessary psychological counseling for their trauma or proper access to medical care through the underfunded, understaffed, and overtaxed VA system, the Republicans freak out! Whatever way this works out, I don’t believe that the military itself will change, just the laws. They will still discriminate against gays, blacks, and women and if a victim has the audacity to report any attack, there will be nothing more than a token investigation and they will “fall in the shower.” I would, however, advise wwhitewew that he may wish to consider whether homosexuality is a greater sin than murder. And no, I’ve never been in the military. I would rather die than kill another human being. If I die, I will simply be reborn in accordance with my karma, but if I murder other human beings, I will eventually die anyway and will then be reborn in hell for countless eons until the heavy negative karma has been purged. I’ve never understood Republicans bringing up the morality of homosexuality in relation to people who are paid to murder people. In case you missed it, there were no exceptions listed under “Thou shalt not kill.” God didn’t say “Thou shalt not kill other Christians unless they pose a valid threat to self, family, or country or you have been ordered to do so by a superior officer.” Don’t hide your head in the sand: Christian and military are not compatible.
May 9th, 2009 at 11:25 amI don’t like right-wing hate mongers, but I am not inhuman. I think we shoulod start a fund drive to purchase as much atropine as possible to resuscitate all Republicans when DADT is reapealed.
May 9th, 2009 at 11:39 amI served in the Army, and was very happy NOT to know if the soldier next to me, who I had to take showers with, was gay or not. A soldier has enough to worry about, without having to worry about getting hit on, by another soldier in their squad. Not everyone in the military is gay.
I am straight, and don’t see the need to tell anyone I am. Therefore, why does a gay or lesbian soldier need to tell everybody else about their sexual preference?
We are all there to win a war, period!
How you live your life, is your business, and I don’t care what your sexual lifestyle is, I would just prefer NOT to know about it.
This is NOT hate speech, and this I am NOT a homophobe.
Sorry if my post offended anyone, but this IS America, and I AM entitled to my opinion.
May 9th, 2009 at 11:46 amPeople call a letter written by the President that deals with gays in the army and repealing the DADT progress. May I ask what progress?
The President may want something, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that he will receive it. According to the governmental set up, Congress is the one to change the laws. Then due to the checks and balances, any changes to the law has to be approved by the judicial branch. Also, a bill has to pass both houses of the legislative branch. So those of you want this to happen overnight, I am sorry to tell you that will take months. And, not to be a downer, Congress has a time frame in which it has to pass laws.
And on a side note, flaming does not help your argument. No disrespect to those older than me, as I am only a high schooler; but when you are trying to make a point and you use profanity or use all caps to emphasize anger, it only hurts your argument. People will not always take you seriously when that occurs in your blogging. Remember this is a blog not social networking.
May 9th, 2009 at 11:58 amI was a Company Commander in a Special Forces group when Clinton started this crap. Now we have another Democratic Commander and Chief, who never served in the military trying to force another Politically correct issue on the Military. During Desert Storm we lived in very close quarters. We lived in pup tent size shelters for months. We went months without the opportunity for a shower. When we did get the chance to shower it was in open tents taking 20 men at a time. Living side by side like this in Combat units or on submarines, you don’t want to worry if the man beside you is having romantic feelings.
Let Obama live in these hardships for about a year and see if he feels the same.
In my civilian world I deal with gays all the time. I don’t believe in their lifestyle but that’s my right. I just spent a couple of days at a College Softball Tourney surrounded by females who are gay. I talked to them and have no problem with them. However I don’t think I would want my daughter forced to sleep and shower next to them if they were all in the Military together. The military is a different world than every day civilian life.
Clinton made a mistake making this one of his top issues when he took office and so will Obama!
May 9th, 2009 at 11:58 amOkay people let’s all put this in perspective shall we. I myself have proudly served in the Military as a United States Sailor with the USN. Now we all know that in intense situations endorphines (sexual/adrenaline hormones) run high. Now, I do believe that everyone has the right to their own sexual orientations/choice of lifestyles, what have you. But, let us be real for a moment shall we? Not a question that needs to be answered out loud, but, How many of you have had sex or strong sexual urges during intense life or death situations? It happens, whether we plan it or not, even with people that we never expected/dreamed we would ever agree to with in a million years. Now say you are in a battle, and your openly gay fox hole mate tells you “I love you man. I have wanted to tell you that since I met you” and you being straight, in serious relationships, what have you, this throws your mind for a loop! Now is your mind going to be 100% of the mission? Just something to think about people. God bless America and our rights to choose and debate.
May 9th, 2009 at 11:58 amsamayavajra- You just slapped the young men and women in uniform giving you the right to have freedom.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:05 pmWhere can you live and have freedom and not have a military to protect that freddom.
Spend some time in third world countries and then come back and tell me you feel the same.
You are a sad and narrow minded person.
I have 6 family members serving now. My family has had someone serve in every generation going back to the Civil War. Without these famlies you do not have the freedoms you enjoy everyday.
As a currently deployed (4th tour overseas) U.S. SSG I know firsthand the detriment of gays in the military. Having openly homosexual soldiers serving degrades morale and trust. I personally would NOT trust an effiminate, girly, faggot to watch my back in combat. I have seen queer females in certain positions and all the dykes hang together and look for new rugs to munch! This letter from our President is sad…I wish the fags and dykes would go back in the closet…in the darkness…right where shameful behaviour should be. Queers should be embarrassed by their actions and not try to flaunt it in my families face. A man was made to be with a woman and was not made to hump another man up the anus. How sick!!!!!!!!!! Our country made a poor decision in this last election but I follow orders…. however homos have no place in the military! Now freinds, if you dislike my termonology and take offense to the phrases dykes, queers, etc. then sorry! Queer by definition means strange and unnatural……aptly put wouldn’t you say! Dyke by definition is simply a female queer…strange! Haven’t you ever noticed how a “bull dyke” appears so manly and rough….that’s because she has gotten away from what is natural and is after something un-natural! How about the physical changes on a homo….their wrists go limp and their voices get soft and faggoty! Doesn’t anyone else out there have a problem with the direction our military and Country is going????
From a decorated combat veteran still serving proudly!
May 9th, 2009 at 12:17 pmthat is scared of the gay. Pussy…
May 9th, 2009 at 12:20 pmNow as to those lipstick lesbians…
May 9th, 2009 at 12:38 pmthank you ricky williams i couldn’t have said it better my self i currently serve in the military also, and i dont see how knowing if someone is gay or a dyke will help win any wars. its so sad to see americans agree with something that would completely ruin the structure that the military is built on.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:49 pmThis action is no less than I expect from Obama. I backed him, voted for him and stand by him for a multitude of reasons. I believe he truly will make changes for the better in this country. Changes take time !!!!! Give him a chance to do what he has promised.
May 9th, 2009 at 12:50 pmI’m a veteran and I feel that openly stating that you’re gay in the military is ignorant and bold. Most often people can tell you’re gay any way because of the demeanor, unnatural behavior and opposite sex movements adopted. The military has a DADT policy, and while it may not be perfect it got folk who are GAY off the hook and basically said, if you’re gay you can serve just don’t say it, no one cares if you’re gay. Now the officer who claims she’s gay, violated a military policy/UCMJ and should be given the boot. The military is a place for dicipline and not a forum to display strange behavior. I personally don’t want to shower with an openly gay man. I don’t run around telling everyone with vision that I’m a BLACK man even if you’re blind you’d know. This country has other things that are far too much more important, such as, voting rights, health care, War, stem cell research, income tax law reform, and keeping the Republicans out of office. I don’t hate gays but, I sure hate your learned behavior, you chose to act strange and now you want everyone you meet to accept your behavior. Those of us which are many who don’t like your chosen way of life are labeled as homophobic and worse. I’ll never accept it until the day I die and I’m not going to attend a same sex wedding ever if invited. I will continue to say marriage is between a man and a woman. So with that being said if you’re a gay man then marry a gay woman, if you’re a gay woman marry a gay man. No PUBLICLY ADMITTED Gays SHOULD SERVE in the MILITARY. k
May 9th, 2009 at 12:52 pmI sure hate your learned behavior, you chose to act strange and now you want everyone you meet to accept your behavior. Those of us which are many who don’t like your chosen way of life
May 9th, 2009 at 1:01 pm—
On what do your base the assumption of learned behavior. As an behavioral ecologist I am familiar with same sexuality in many nonhuman species as well as the complex interactions of hormones on the devlopmental process. I recognize that the jury remains out on the origins and complexities involved in gender identity yet you seem to suggest that you have a solid answer. How did you come to this conclusion and upon what data did you base your analysis?
thanks and best-
No PUBLICLY ADMITTED Gays SHOULD SERVE in the MILITARY
May 9th, 2009 at 1:03 pm—
Why not? Please be specific.
thanks-
gelo1: sounds to me like you’ve got serious fear issues. Or just repressed self-hatred. A little light in the combat boots yourself, perhaps?
May 9th, 2009 at 1:07 pmits so sad to see americans agree with something that would completely ruin the structure that the military is built on.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:11 pm—-
Which is what? Specifics help support stances…
To all you soldiers who apparently emailed each other to get onto this thread (if you’re not all the same person using different handles): I appreciate and respect your service to our nation, but it sounds to me like you all are afraid that deep down you might be gay. What’s up with that?
May 9th, 2009 at 1:20 pmThe purpose of the United States military is to be as effective a fighting force as possible to protect the American people. The consensus throughout the military is that parading alternative lifestyles is a potential cause of division within the ranks. The current DADT policy is a compromise under which gays may serve provided that they recognize this reality and do not discuss their lifestyle. Many probably have done so, without issue. This is the best compromise for all involved.
This woman was not trying to be a good soldier. She was trying to cause a stir, and Obama (who has no military experience himself) naively fell for it. The military will be seriously harmed by a repeal of DADT. The men and women who are actually out there serving our country absolutely do not want it to happen. Many have told me personally that it would discourage them from re-enlisting. Who will replace them? We’re having a difficult time meeting our personnel goals as it is.
I’ve read through all these comments and I’ve yet to read even one that explains WHY the military would be a mor effective fighting force (which again, is its purpose) with gays openly serving. All I see are a bunch of juvenile responses along the lines of “You must fear that you’re gay too.” No, I don’t. But I’ve served this country long enough to know what is in the military’s best interests. This is not the time for social experiments.
Incidentally, I find it curious that Obama would adopt this stance at a time when he claims to be making an outreach to the Muslim world. How do you think Muslims feel about homosexuality?
Capt. Wm. McKinney
May 9th, 2009 at 1:48 pmU.S. Army
This is insane the problem with gays in the military is accomadation, there are many times where things that are usually private are done in groups such as showering. I would have loved to been doing my daily bathroom routine with one hundred naked women insteed of the 100 men that were in my battalion but you can see the problem that would cause
May 9th, 2009 at 1:50 pmThis is the first thing that President Obama has done that I do not support 100%. I am a 20 year retired Chief Petty Officer from the US Navy. I spent my career in the submarine service. Having 120 men sealed in a large metal tube for months at a time is not the type of environment that is a proper place for a gay man. What someone wants to do in their own time is a choice that they are able to make themselves. It is not right to force heterosexual men who have chosen to serve our country in our Navy to have to be in this environment with men who like to have sex with other men. Even if it is not on a submarine life in the Navy on board ship is an isolated environment, in close quarters. I can not speak for the other services. I am sure that people from the other services can say why they think the military is not the place for people that are gay. I am sure that other people, both in the military and the civilian worls will disagree with what I have said.
May 9th, 2009 at 1:58 pmevery body wants to talk about gay rights how about straight rights. i do not know one straight person who wants to take showers with a gay person in the shower area. you do not let male and females shower together in the military. if the gays are allowed to check out the same sex then where are the straight person rights. would you be happy if your straight kids took a shower at school after gym or a sports practice and a gay kid was checking them out? if you would then why do people keep male and female straight kids seperate in school locker rooms. you can pay anyone you want to do a study saying they are born gay all you want they were still payed to do the study. being gay is a choice. people say gay is a alternative lifestyle. so is being a terrorist and so is a perverts sexual preferences. s & m is considered an alternative lifestyle so it is ok to go to work in leather bondage outfits? this is the way i feel if it offends anybody then you know how i feel about gays trying to tell my kids that it is ok.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:09 pmthere are many times where things that are usually private are done in groups such as showering.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:12 pm–
I have showered with gay men. It is no biggie. They aren’t after you. They are just getting clean. Get over yourself.
Why do people who are gay feel the need to announce to the world that they are gay? Whether someone is gay or straight I could give a rats @$$ what you do in your bed!!I don’t go around screaming to the world that I love vagina!! It seems some love the attention.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:15 pmSadly, If DADT was repealed, it would go back to zero tolerance of homosexuals in the military which was much worse for homosexuals in the army than DADT. If zero tolerance is repealed, and gays are openly allowed to serve in the military, the sad fact would be the hundreds of soldiers, NCO’s, Officers and leaders careers that will be ruined by EEO complaints and IG invesgigations that would then be abused by soldiers who are facing puinitive action for disciplinary reasons who could now claim discrimination because they are “gay”. EEO and IG complaints supercede rank and the chain of command and are very hard to disprove once a complaint is made, no matter the merits of the complaint. Alot of good military leaders will be forced out of service, or will resign in the event of an openly gay military service.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:20 pmYou people slay me. You know the homo rule UPFRONT, still you try your BULL&*^%. Why? Maybe it is that whole ‘lifestyle thing. Stay away and our country will be a safer place. As for the Liberal president….Let not go on that JOKE. Sad how many sheep voted for that clown. Yeah overturn the DADT so I can get away from the REAL homos, this way I know FOR sure who they are, just not the guessing games that go on now. If something happens to you gay fags, OH well, you have it comming. A soldier does what is expected now what they THINK how it should be. POOF.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:21 pmThe part I don’t get is that it seems you all can do this shower thing if you don’t know who is gay and who isn’t gay but if you do you get all sketched out. What is up with that?
May 9th, 2009 at 2:21 pmIt’s really sad that people will judge someon based soley on their sexual orientation. That proves that some of the people can be anti-American values all the time.
When I served in the Army, not one of my roommates had a problem with my being gay. I didn’t have a problem with their heterosexuality, either! This was during the late 80’s, well before DADT and the latests polls with majority of Americans supporting DADT.
I just wish they didn’t feel the need to shove their lifestyle in my face all the time, talking about how hot the “chicks” were on the street, staring at women and making comments about what they wanted to do to them, and constantly talking about who and what they did the night/weekend before.
Why do male heterosexual service members feel the need to shove their lifestyle in everyone’s faces?
May 9th, 2009 at 2:29 pmThicknecks slay me….
May 9th, 2009 at 2:30 pmI forgot to mention, Sandy Tsao is not an officer if she was asked to resign her commission and was administratevly dismissed (punitive or non punitive is immaterial)from the military for being openly gay. An officer does not violate the UCMJ or violate the sworn policies of the Nation to forward their own personal agenda. Her actions violated the Oath of Office, her priviledge to serve as a commisionned officer, and are disgraceful to honorably serving Military Officers.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:33 pmif a guy looked and dressed as a woman and was in the shower room the females don’t have a right to be upset when they find out it was a guy. is that what you are saying? just like a female would be upset so are straight guys up when they find out for sure someone gay is in the group
May 9th, 2009 at 2:34 pmFunny how the gays are Democrats too, wow. I wonder what rights the Non-gays are going to get….you betcha….Just like your change….you have none in your pockets.
Good luck with that one.
War brings PEACE…….everytime
May 9th, 2009 at 2:37 pmbeing gay is not an orientation it is a choice. why do gays try to force their views on straight people (looking or dressing butch for the females and being so gay acting for the males
May 9th, 2009 at 2:37 pmIt also seems that American heterosexual males are less capable that heterosexual males from the UK and Canada in their ability to serve with openly gay members. Both of these countries allow openly gay members to serve, and they haven’t had problems retaining heterosexual service members.
Only 6 (six) out of 28 (twenty eight) NATO countries only allow heterosexuals to be “open” about their lifestyle. It seems America isn’t up to the standards as the majority of the other NATO countires. We’re only as “good” as Bulgaria, Latvia, Poland, Romania, and Turkey.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:40 pmGay men are men. Some men are bothered. So what? They can get over it, or they can get out. Think of it as fighting for freedom. Civil Rights. This compares well to the difficulties of integration. White guys were screaming that it would ruin the military—it didn’t. The only problems were caused by bigots.
Get in line, or get out. It’s the military.
All you people who think being openly gay is “in your face”, try hiding your sexuality for a while.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:41 pm#161 – louie123 Says:
———————————————————
“being gay is not an orientation it is a choice. why do gays try to force their views on straight people (looking or dressing butch for the females and being so gay acting for the males”
May 9th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Why do hetersexual males feel they have to shove their lifestyle in everyone’s face? Why do they have to talk about their latest exploits all the time? Why do they have to regale their cohorts with comments about the women they ee all the time? Why do they have to talk about their wives all the time? Can’t they “choose” to keep their personal lives to themseves?
Or do they “choose” to push their lifestyle in everyones face on purpose?
When did you “choose” to be sexually attracted to the opposite sex? Was it when you hit puberty, or later in life?
May 9th, 2009 at 2:43 pmThe Dont Ask Dont Tell policy was put in place by none other than a previous democrat in office namely Bill Clinton. The republicans did not have a hand in that legislation. Now since Obama wants to get rid of the DADT why doesn’t he go one step further and let men and women in the military to bunk together in the same bed also. It will make our military one happy and gay place.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:43 pmcivil rights was a race thing not someone wanting to teach our children that God made adam and steve and the other counties that don’t allow homos who was the last terrorist from their countries. loosing the wholesome family values is getting our kids killed in school and educators afraid to punish gays because the gays claim it is motivated by them being gay
May 9th, 2009 at 2:46 pmSeems only 6 of the 28 NATO members have it right. We LEAD the way, we DON’T follow….Demo rat soldier. You keep towing your socialist line, it makes be proud to be on WATCH for your types. You sympathize with the lowlifes, fine, we create that opportunity ever day we protect freedom, no one is stopping you from moving to Canada either. Go there and join their army. The UK soldiers I have the opportunity to work with are NOT openly gay.
War brings PEACE…..EVERY TIME
May 9th, 2009 at 2:50 pmthis makes me sick. Im so tired of gays pushing their bs crap on everyone else. Obama says everything so that all will like him but he has done nothing but ruin this country. I am disappointed.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:55 pmI notice none here wants to discuss the evolution of sam sexuality in biological communities. Instead we get more nonsense about a cloud sitter creating stuff the ay you wish it to be. Gender identity is a complex situation but clearly one that needs to be examined in a context beyond chosen gods and fairy tale stories about Adam, Eve, and a dude named Steve…
May 9th, 2009 at 2:57 pmkt8990…..WOW you hit a HOMERUN with that one….AMEN Brother!
War bring PEACE….Every TIME
May 9th, 2009 at 2:57 pm“so what’s taking so long”? Are you kidding me? I wish the only thing our nation and our President had to do and had to worry about was to change a policy on homeosexual military members. You all voted for change, well, give him time, I’m sure things will change. And that’s all we’ll be left with in four years is change.
May 9th, 2009 at 2:58 pmi choose females when i figured out the difference between males and females. i chose what God intended
May 9th, 2009 at 2:58 pmThanks SSG.
I guess the only thing to do right now is put this in God’s hands. I am seriously praying for this nation.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:00 pmany time you want to defend gays think of the children who are never borne because mommy or daddy couldn’t live a normal life. and be glad your parents were not gay. you wouldn’t be here for us normal (non gay) people to have to listen to your bs. correct me if i am wrong bot didn’t we get a hussein out of leadership to put another on in office in our country? barack hussein obama or however you spell it
May 9th, 2009 at 3:04 pmi back you up louie123
May 9th, 2009 at 3:06 pmktdaisy11…..Don’t hold out hope…..they will spend our change too. They are burning through all of the dollars are we type, I assure you. They gays want their stimulus package too, so it seems.
War bring PEACE….Every Time.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:07 pmyup sad but true
May 9th, 2009 at 3:09 pmWhen you have bad and evil running rampant in the country one lives, and lives to protect, prayer helps, we’ll see if he can rid the evildoers running this great country into and UNDER the ground. This gay issue is bad anyway you slice it.
War bring PEACE…EVERY TIME.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:15 pmAll of you for change, check out this link.
Let the videos do the talking for themselves.
Osama
War bring PEACE….EVERY TIME.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:18 pm“evildoers”? Do they “hate freedoms”. Cliches slay me…
May 9th, 2009 at 3:20 pmi chose what God intended
May 9th, 2009 at 3:21 pm—
Which god and how do you know what the intent of a supreme being might be? Think objectively please…
God (who is) doesent want people to be gay at all. So shall obama be judged in the end for taking up the wrong side of this issue and leading so many souls to hell. Please pray for the misguided and maybe this issue could have a better ending
May 9th, 2009 at 3:24 pmany time you want to defend gays think of the children who are never borne because mommy or daddy couldn’t live a normal life.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:25 pm— Sexuality in social animals has many dimensions which go beyond reproduction. If you are interested in this topic I can point you toward much of the work which has been written on the subject. Do you realize that those “manly” bighorn sheep live in what biologists consider gay affiliations?
The letter and article were used from Windy City Times’s newspaper’s web site. Please credit the source. Other media have also used this without permission. All we ask is folks to credit original sources and link to the original source articles. http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=21121
May 9th, 2009 at 3:26 pmGod (who is) doesent want people to be gay at all.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:30 pm—
Saying things does not make them realities. Can you point to any tangible evidences in support of this statement? It makes it easier to have a discussion that way. If you just believe stuff because someone told you to or whatever that’s cool with me but don’t expect others to
so someone says and writes that gays are born and it is not a choice thing told you that and you believed them
May 9th, 2009 at 3:38 pmHere’s a quote from a retired gay Admiral
link
Only 8% of soldiers deployed in Iraq are in a group shower situation.
Gays have been with us as long as we have been here. Somehow we manage. Maybe you poofs who fold in the presence of gays shouldn’t be in the military.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:41 pmif you want to know that being gay is wrong. watch the birth of a child. two gays make AIDS. two hetro’s make babies my kids are glad i picked babies not AIDS
May 9th, 2009 at 3:42 pmSSG Anti Gays Says:
Funny how the gays are Democrats too, wow. I wonder what rights the Non-gays are going to get….you betcha….Just like your change….you have none in your pockets.
Good luck with that one.
War brings PEACE…….everytime
Yeah, you know what? One of my friends is a Republican homosexual. Voted for McCain and stood behind his policies. Still does stand behind Republican policies, even though he stands behind laws for gay marriage.
Bet that blew your mind.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:43 pmlouie123 Says:
if you want to know that being gay is wrong. watch the birth of a child. two gays make AIDS. two hetro’s make babies my kids are glad i picked babies not AIDS
Flagged for a sick perpetuation of a myth.
AIDS is an STD transmitted through both homosexuals and heterosexuals. Get it right.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:45 pmA Another
I infected
D _ick
S sucker
A anal
May 9th, 2009 at 3:48 pmI inflected
D death
S sentence
I do not support the DADT progam in the military and think all who are willing should be permitted to serve. What is more frightening to me is the christian right trying to use the military as a propaganda tool for a religeous point of view. We are a pluralistic country.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:49 pmWell, been nice knowing you and your sick stereotypes, louie123. Don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out.
May 9th, 2009 at 3:52 pmlet them join put them all together and send them in to fight first problem solved
May 9th, 2009 at 3:52 pmi am a sick sterotype for wanting my kids to grow up knowing that a mom and dad is the right thing. or are you sick for thinking someone who chooses to be gay is not sick
May 9th, 2009 at 3:55 pmthey say ADD in kids is a mental problem and give them a pill. if you truly are born wanting to be gay then it is a mental problem why don’t they make a pill to fix that
I’m not calling you a stereotype. I’m calling you a stereotyper. You are stereotyping gays, louie–you are branding gay people as being containers for AIDS; that’s what I’m flagging your inconsiderate comments.
It’s all genetics and environment that decide on who and what a person is. I just hope that you understand that AIDS is not a disease that came from homosexuals, nor is it spread by just homosexuals. I plead that you at least teach your kids that much.
May 9th, 2009 at 4:04 pmso someone says and writes that gays are born and it is not a choice thing told you that and you believed them
—
May 9th, 2009 at 4:10 pmNo instead I got multiple degrees in the foundations of animal behavior and other applications of life science and modern scientific thought. Didn’t you train to understand whatever it is your speciality is?
some on taught you to think that way then
May 9th, 2009 at 4:12 pmthere is no medical test for being gay all you have is gay people saying they have always known they were gay. to jusitify the choice they made to be gay
May 9th, 2009 at 4:16 pmdoes anyone know if obama said he wasn’t going to raise taxes or not?
May 9th, 2009 at 4:18 pmto get elected
May 9th, 2009 at 4:19 pmsome on taught you to think that way then
—
May 9th, 2009 at 4:33 pmNot exactly. See I was forced to look at theory and evidences and draw conclusions and thenm apply them to novile settings. Looking objectively at the data tells you a white dude with a beard made a guy from dirt and a gal from a bone and then said this is how shit is? That makes no objective sense. My educational process reguired clear thought and the encouraging of questioning. I can point to my evidences. Can you?
There is no medical test for being straight.
Hey Dbadass, tell us about the gay animals. Researchers have found a gay squid, no?
May 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pmdoes anyone know if obama said he wasn’t going to raise taxes or not?
—–
May 9th, 2009 at 4:36 pmDoes this relate to the thread or do you just want to talk about taxes? Like your service, I too am prepared to pay the debt incurred by prior administrations and grossly aggrevated by the little Bush’s difficult term. Somebody has to pay to clean up the mess. Better that then let it fester or put it off. Taxes are no biggie. It is just paying the bills. I have never felt over taxed in my life. Taxes pay for things.
Researchers have found a gay squid, no?
—
May 9th, 2009 at 4:52 pmWell there is a substantial poulation in the Navy….
It’s time to refer to the study
Maybe you’re not really gay. Maybe you got drunk and let a guy give you a blow job and you can’t get over it. Try getting over it.
Another cause of homophobia is fear
May 9th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Don’t know what the problem is with link lately. Try again to link to study of homosexual arousal in homophobes.
May 9th, 2009 at 4:54 pmThe Coast Guard poulation has been known to science for years but all evidences pointed toward other more…
May 9th, 2009 at 4:54 pmI don’t care whether someone is a homosexual or a homophobe. I do care whether said homosexuals and homophobes express their identities responsibly. For my argument, I will use the military shower situation mentioned frequently in this comment thread as my example. You may replace “soldier” with any other occupation and “shower” with any other situation at your own discretion.
If a homosexual male soldier believes a heterosexual male soldier sharing the same shower is attractive, that is acceptable. Many heterosexual males find homosexual females attractive, and that is very much the same principle. It is natural to find things attractive, no matter what that attraction may be towards.
If the same homosexual male solider acts on his attraction to the heterosexual male soldier physically within that shower situation, that is not acceptable. Telling someone clearly disinterested about one’s desire to commit various sexual acts with or on that person is sexual harassment, no matter what the genders of the two parties in this situation are.
If a heterosexual male soldier is uncomfortable showering with an openly homosexual male soldier, that is acceptable. Every person can find something about their environment uncomfortable for purely opinionated reasons. Said reasons can range from the minor (not liking black-clothed people) to the major (not liking black-skinned people), but in the end, they are just opinions.
If said heterosexual male soldier wishes to prevent the homosexual male from serving altogether because of the discomfort in the shower situation, that is not acceptable. The responsibility of discomfort towards anyone or anything lies solely with the party expressing the discomfort. Punishing the discomforting party for this reason alone is irresponsible, for that party has no fault in the discomfort.
Actions may be taken when the discomfort becomes physical, such as in cases of violence, sexual harassment, theft, allergies, etc. However, these actions must also be handled responsibly. You cannot punish all homosexuals if one homosexual performs an unacceptable sexual action on another person, even if that other person is also homosexual.
You cannot deny all students access to peanut goods if one student exhibits an allergy, but actions must be taken so that the allergic student is not put in harm’s way. However, if the other students agree to removing all peanuts from a school, that action may be taken. Similarly, if all soldiers agree to have nothing to do with the homosexual soldier who acted unacceptably, they have the right to remove that soldier from their ranks.
In conclusion, all opinions are internal and should remain internal until they can be expressed responsibly. Speaking of expression, in my opinion, the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy favors the irresponsibility of the heterosexual soldiers and punishes current and prospective homosexual soldiers for their identity. Said identity may or may not be determined by birth or the person’s own whims, but in all cases must be exhibited responsibly.
If an openly homosexual person refrains from acting on his or her attractions, that person should be allowed to serve in the military. If that person’s heterosexual colleagues have negative opinions about that soldier’s identity but are not threatened physically by the soldier, they should not let the opinions impede on the duties of either the homosexual or the heterosexual soldiers.
Thank you for reading.
May 9th, 2009 at 4:54 pmWhere has all the outrage been over urinals in public restrooms? I think I’ve heard one man complain about it my whole life. And there men are standing around dick in hand.
May 9th, 2009 at 4:58 pmwiley:
May 9th, 2009 at 5:06 pmThat results of that study are interesting and oft noted but it is likely that the increased blood flow to their dicks could just be the result of their hyper concerns about the issues of sexuality and insecurity. I call it the Fraternity Effect
My thoughts are these having served in the military. Gay soldiers will hit on anyone they are interested in. Guys see a girl they like and they want to have some kind of a relationship with her they will present themselves. They are quite forward in making known they are interested.
May 9th, 2009 at 5:10 pmHomosexuals are more or less going to act in the same manner toward a male soldier. Now lets place these two in a foxhole with loaded weapons. The A type male will likely take offense by a homosexual and would use the homosexual weapon on him claiming the homosexual committed suicide. Sound familiar to you fragmentation explosions on officer and noncommissioned officers as the injured party felt the person had it coming during waring engagements. These are known as operational objective to take out the enemy. Homosexuals will face attacks and it will look like suicide.
I’m always for the fighting soldier to take care of those around them that would place their lives in jeopardy. Need I say more.
Obama has never served in the military and he thinks with his liberal bias toward the military. Commander in Chief were he mine. I would get out and turn the military over to Pansy waisted homosexual. Perhaps he would like to dress them all in rainbow colors so the enemy would run from them.
The Commander In Chief has a desire for a homosexual military. Good way to further destroy a proud institution of the United States.
No, I’m not a homophobic. I believe as civilians they can do whatever they want but be in the military, no way!!!!
Why is it that everyone is so color-blind that they can only see this as a simple black and white issue of pro- or anti-? Simple black-and-white answers are about as frequent in life as those ‘colors’ are in the environment. Okay, I know some of the reasons… ignorance, morale, and fear of the unknown–which had terrified me at the age of 17 in New Orleans when a homosexual signalled an offer of a ride while I was waiting for a bus (I stepped out at the next traffic light)–but I have yet to hear mentioned a fourth issue: a soldier who can’t walk can’t serve. And there was this story about a ship’s cannon exploding a few years ago amid rumors of a homosexual love-affair gone awry.
May 9th, 2009 at 5:13 pmIf one knows only of males and females in the world it simplifies the argument. But into which category does one place those humans who are neither? How can you treat them respectfully if you don’t even know of their existence? But I’m going to write this in chronological order.
When I was draftedinto the U.S. Army in 1967 at the age of 20, I was not agreeing to have my feet damaged so that a homosexual would have the opportunity to learn in private if I might be interested in an encounter. The sergeant issuing the footwear was homosexual. He issued a pair for me that was two sizes too small. They had told us that their boots are measured differently, so request the next size smaller than that to which you are accustomed. I wore size 12 boots but I requested 11. He issued size 10 while my whole platoon–all 40-or-so of us–was in the room. I was unaware of this for weeks, but his issuing small boots ensured that due to the extreme demands placed on my feet in the ensuing weeks from running miles every day, and traversing obstacle courses, etc., that I would return for the correct size soon–without the rest of my platoon in attendance. He would then be assured of an opportunity to see if I would accept or reject his advances without the unpredictable reactions of 40 guys. It might not have mattered to him that by the time I learned that my boots and shoes were far too small, my feet had been severely-damaged, and–when wearing footwear, I could get down the stairs to stand in formation only by holding onto the hand-rail–until I was forced to go to sick-call where I was prescribed darvon and valium: pain-killers and muscle-relaxers. An employer in 1978 who I had much-later realized was homosexual, might have explained it when he called me “queer-bait”.
Discover Magazine devoted an entire issue to human reproductive processes, its variations, and its complications, around June of 1993. It said there are 1,000 babies born every year in the U.S. whose genitalia are such that the doctor cannot determine the sex. I have to wonder if the genes and hormones are able to produce an unrecognizable phenotype (physical manifestation of the genes’ influence), how much more easily and dramatically might their influence be on orientation? So, discrimination against anyone because of their sexual orientation seems unfair, especially since they may not have any choice in the matter, and their orientation may be entirely against their wishes. That anyone would choose to be homosexual in a culture that is so anti-homosexual defies logic, anyway, unless they’re masochistic. But I still wonder about the two instances in the Bible when they were uh… uncool and pushy–Genesis 19:4 and Judges 19:22–you don’t do what they intended to angels… and today when some homosexuals refer to heterosexuals as ‘breeders’, an offensive term that implies that their status is the preferred one. I suspect over-compensation for culturally-shaped ‘deficiencies’ to play a role.
I am an unequivocal heterosexual, but after learning it is far more complicated an issue, I could no longer be anti-homosexual. But I won’t call them gays. The word, gay, used to mean happy, light-hearted–and I have yet to meet a happy, light-hearted homosexual, which is unfortunate, since they, too, have a right to live a life that is fulfilling for them. And I resent their usurping that term along with the rainbow. Typical of government stupidity, in order for the homosexuals to serve they have to be mixed in with the heterosexuals instead of having separate-but-equal arrangements, but the military is peopled with the ultimate-incompetents. I don’t have answers to all of the issues, but this one is yes, homosexuals should be allowed to serve openly in the military, but with complete separation for the protection of everyone which would resolve all of the issues if their most-senior officer had no bias. It is not fair to either sex to be subordinate to one of the opposite orientation and any homosexuals who want to serve should be welcomed.
dbadass my question on taxes was directed at every persons taxes being raised not just people who choose to smoke and drink. people say it is because smokers and drinkers have more health problems. however isn’t aids in gays at a higher percentage in gays then hetro’s. just wondering if there is a proven study on this
May 9th, 2009 at 5:18 pmjust wondering if there is a proven study on this
–
May 9th, 2009 at 5:25 pmI am not sure but I suppose we could look. Still it seems you assume all incidents of sexual identity selection are choice driven. I would diasgree
The word selection screwed up that whole sentence. Sorry about that…
May 9th, 2009 at 5:28 pmyou choose to suck _ick or you don’t a female chooses to eat a woman out or not. how can it not be a choice
May 9th, 2009 at 5:29 pmWhen I was in boot camp, I was thrown a pair of shoes that was two sizes too big. I still have shin splints. The sexual orientation of the person handing out the shoes is irrelevant. I marched in low quarters because women weren’t issued combat boots at the time.
2Bfair, there may be something to the endocrine disrupting chemicals and sexual orientation, but there were gays long before those chemicals were manufactured. A lot of women have discovered that they cannot have children because they have internal testes instead of ovaries. But they have always identified themselves as female and were heterosexual. Gender is a social construct. Sexual orientation is endogenous.
It’s part of boot camp. It’s taking what you’re given and shutting up. It’s tolerating discomfort, inconvenience, and pain. It’s about obedience.
louie, everybody’s taxes weren’t raised. Most people got tax cuts. Pay attention.
May 9th, 2009 at 5:35 pmMy reply to you:
dbadass Says:
You told us you have showered with Gay’s. It was choice and obviously something you looked forward to during. Your preference sounds to be bi-bisexuals which would lead us to believe you are biased in your thinking.
May 9th, 2009 at 5:36 pmThe military is tight knit fighting machine for one purpose to protect the United States from all enemies foreign and domestic. When you take away the cohesion that makes up this force you jeopardize the very fabric of the forces.
Commander in Chief Obama should stop thinking like a Law Professor and let the General’s run the services. Otherwise he may see a mass exodus putting our nation further at risk. He has have already opened to many cans of worm over GITMO and any further destructive comments or ideas which are liberal will not sit well with the constituency that did not vote for him. I believe the American people are getting to see a true liberal in action and it will be a long time before another liberal will grace the halls of the White House as its chief Executive.
A man chooses to f^ck a woman or not. He chooses to eat out a woman or not. How can it not be a choice?
May 9th, 2009 at 5:38 pmyes most people got tax cuts and then smokers and drinkers were singled out to pay additional taxes to help make up some of the difference. were you not paying attention or just happy you got a tax cut and others had to pay more because of it
May 9th, 2009 at 5:40 pmhey wiley it is a choice for hetro’s to be hetro’s or we could be like you a candy ass liberal who doesn’t like that there are people who will never belive that gays are ok in the armed forces or schools around our young and impressionable kids.
May 9th, 2009 at 5:43 pmlouie123 Says:
you choose to suck _ick or you don’t a female chooses to eat a woman out or not. how can it not be a choice
–
What you have described, louie123, are actions, not sexual orientation. One does not need to practice homosexual actions in order to have a homosexual identity. Likewise, there are documented instances of heterosexual people willingly engaging in homosexual actions, and vice versa. The actions are indeed a choice, but the orientation of those performing the actions may not be.
May 9th, 2009 at 5:52 pmIt was choice and obviously something you looked forward to during
May 9th, 2009 at 5:54 pm___
See that is the thing. This line of attack is so predictable. I hope strategy isn’t your area of responsibilty. Implying I am gay because you can note pony up an intelligent response is plan weak. Besides I have the xx stats on my side on this one. I am like two deviations at least above you on this on , I would bet…
hetro’s like being with a different sex and say they were born that way
May 9th, 2009 at 5:55 pmgays like being the same sex and say they were born that way
gays want people to believe this how long before pervs who prey on kids and rapist start saying the same thing. are we to then start slowly accepting that also.
how long before they start paying for studies so the can prey on kids and rape people
May 9th, 2009 at 5:59 pmthat kind of thinking would say that if you are born that way then it should be ok
May 9th, 2009 at 6:00 pmfor one the current president has never served in the military and technically not the commander in`chief b/c we have not declared war on a specific country. their is a reason we have a no gay policy in the military. we hold our military to a higher level of responsability and discipline. their is no room for a man seeking another man or vise versa in the middle of a war or a barraks i can guarantee if it goes through their will be a sky rocket of hate crime within our miltary. this guy doesnt have the qualifications to run a burger king let alone a military/ country. he’s an idiot
May 9th, 2009 at 6:00 pmOur military is here to protect us. We dont need some queen swinging his purse at the enemy.Keep fags out of the military it will only cause problems with the real soldiers.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:01 pmdbadass Says:
Not exactly. See I was forced to look at theory and evidences and draw conclusions and thenm apply them to novile settings. Looking objectively at the data tells you a white dude with a beard made a guy from dirt and a gal from a bone and then said this is how shit is? That makes no objective sense. My educational process reguired clear thought and the encouraging of questioning. I can point to my evidences. Can you?
It is called FAITH either you have it or you don’t, maybe it all is just a fairy tale in which case when you die you just blink out of existence, it is your right to believe that. But not me, I believe I have a eternal soul, and I believe that soul will be judged by God, who has clearly said that that a gay lifestyle is disgusting. so you keep your expressing your beliefs and I’ll keep my FAITH, too bad we will have to wait til the end of time to find out which of us is right.
Or maybe we will find out sooner there is another fairy tale Soddom And Gommorrah, that describes the wrath of God.
As a Veteran who served in Desert Shield/Desert Storm it sickens me that we Americans are even discussing this issue, our country has bigger problems than gay rights at this time and that is what our Commander in Chief should be thinking about not gays in the military…..
May 9th, 2009 at 6:01 pmkeep them out of our military, i dont want a buch of but pirates keeping my family safe, i know that since you cant reproduce with eachother you have no concept of actually raising your son/daughter…
May 9th, 2009 at 6:02 pmqueers should be scared
May 9th, 2009 at 6:04 pmJust the fact that Obama is addressing the situation and working towards change is extremely beneficial.
Everything involving the laws/regulations takes time, and this isn’t necessarily a negative thing. Lasting changes need planning, so issues do not arise later.
Give him time to get the job done correctly.
He’ll keep his word.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:06 pmwho has clearly said that that a gay lifestyle is disgusting.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:08 pm—
For the purposes of this assignment it is sort of assumed that source citations will be present…
queers should be scared
—
May 9th, 2009 at 6:10 pmWhy and of what?
do you people really think that there is enough gay people to make up the difference in the military when alot of hetro’s quit joining because they do not want to have a homo checking them out in the nude. if it is ok for a gay to get the chance to check out the private parts of the same sex they are attracted to against the will of the person they are checking out. then you are saying that hetro’s should have to shower together so they can check out the sex they are attracted to. or do the gays have more right to see the sex they are attracted to then hetro’s
May 9th, 2009 at 6:12 pmLouie123, you keep using the description of actions in your argument, while sexual preference is a passive trait. As disagreeable as any sexual preference may be, from homosexuality to paedophilia and other frowned-upon preferences, simply thinking that way should not be punishable. It is when harmful actions are taken that the line should be permanently be drawn.
I don’t agree with people who find attraction in beings who do not or cannot express consent, but they have every right to find such attraction as long as they do not act upon their attractions while harming the non-consenting party. Likewise, homosexuals who express consent with each other should be fully allowed to act upon their attractions, much like consenting heterosexuals have every right to act.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:14 pmLouie123, Neopardy should take a lesson…
May 9th, 2009 at 6:19 pmAllowing gays into the military isn’t any issue regarding sexual attraction, it’s about equal rights.
ANYONE should be allowed to serve, if they are straight, gay, bi-sexual, or whatever.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:19 pmgays using “rights” as an excuse to put themselves in a position in the military and schools to be able to see the same sex nude against the will of the hetro. how is that ok
May 9th, 2009 at 6:19 pmIt’s so easy for people never in the military to demand an immediate reversal of the Armed Forces policy on gays. Can you imagine the logistics and funding that’s going to be needed to add new sex facilities (bathrooms, showers, bedrooms, etc.) in every base in the US and overseas? You see, soldiers dont want to take showers in front of people of the same sex looking at them with passion and sex in their eyes. That’s one reason why males and females are currently separated. Also, be advised that for every military member from an openly gay region of the United States, there’s probably about 10 that’s not.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:22 pmYou are assuming that gays are always checking out heterosexuals. Which is simply ridiculous. Unless you are a homosexual that always checks out heterosexuals I don’t know how you could defend your argument—
May 9th, 2009 at 6:23 pmtejays people don’t agree with people choosing to live a gay life style. so what makes your views on pervs and rapist right if the views of people against gays is wrong because some people say it is ok
May 9th, 2009 at 6:23 pmlouie123
What actor played the soldier that made the none legged simpleton dance in Platoon?
May 9th, 2009 at 6:28 pmcdavis11 i am hetro and always checking out females and there have to be gays that do the same thing or are they perfect and only check out the ones they are attracted to which could be any of us
May 9th, 2009 at 6:29 pmIt appears that most of the homophobe brigade is not reading the posts that disagree with them. Anyone who is so debilitated by fear of homosexuality that they cannot serve competently, and honorably in the armed forces if they know they are working with gays, cannot, in my opinion, be trusted with a weapon.
You’re emotional basket cases and drama queens.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:31 pmnone? I ment “one”
May 9th, 2009 at 6:32 pmHaha! Well, I am a heterosexual and I don’t check out every guy. Only the ones I find attractive. So, I believe straight men would have very little to worry about seeing as I doubt every gay would be checking out all the males/females they are stationed with—
May 9th, 2009 at 6:34 pmThe DADT policy was introduced as a compromise measure in 1993 and approved by then President Bill Clinton who, while campaigning for the Presidency, had promised to allow all citizens regardless of sexual orientation to serve openly in the military, a departure from the then complete ban on those who are not heterosexual. The actual policy was crafted by Colin Powell and was maintained by Clinton’s successor, George W. Bush.Don’t ask, don’t tell is the common term for the policy about homosexuality in the U.S. military mandated by federal law Pub.L. 103-160 (10 U.S.C. § 654). So, contrary to popular belief that President Bush initiated the law, actually, President Clinton started this DADT policy.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:36 pmSince it is a law now, then Congress will have to pass a new bill to change the current law.
so you wouldn’t mind showering with an openly gay guy? so would you pick up the soap straight legged or squatting or after they left the shower?
May 9th, 2009 at 6:38 pmlouie123 Says:
tejays people don’t agree with people choosing to live a gay life style. so what makes your views on pervs and rapist right if the views of people against gays is wrong because some people say it is ok
–
You are right — some people do not agree with people who “choose a gay lifestyle” (which involves homosexual persons acting in accordance to what is expected of their passive sexual orientation). As well, some people do not agree with the people who do not agree with people who “choose a gay lifestyle.” It is all a matter of opinion, and every single person is entitled to their opinion, even if that opinion makes that person a “perv.”
While I respect the right to hold even the most perverted opinion, I do not respect people who act on these opinions when they are harmful. This includes rape, which by definition is a sexual action in which one party did not consent to the action. Rapists do not deserve any rights or respect, as they chose to perform a very harmful action.
Before you choose to act on an argument that homosexual sex is harmful, allow me to remind you that as long as both (or all, if more than two people are taking part in the action) people performing the action know the possible consequences and still agree to act, they should be allowed to. This is the same with heterosexual actions. It is all a matter of responsibility in all active persons.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:41 pmtejay says While I respect the right to hold even the most perverted opinion, I do not respect people who act on these opinions when they are harmful. This includes rape, which by definition is a sexual action in which one party did not consent to the action. Rapists do not deserve any rights or respect, as they chose to perform a very harmful action.
and says being gay is ok.
it harms a hetro mentally when a gay person is viewing them nude. so i guess harming a gay parson mentally by not giving them rights is bad and them harming a hetro mentally is ok
May 9th, 2009 at 6:48 pmhetro’s don’t consent to being checked out in the nude by fagggs just like females don’t consent to males checking them out nude in the shower
May 9th, 2009 at 6:50 pmso you wouldn’t mind showering with an openly gay guy? so would you pick up the soap straight legged or squatting or after they left the shower?
—
May 9th, 2009 at 6:52 pmNo I wouldn’t as I am perfectly capable of politley declining any avdance from any male who might find me attractive, In the modern world it is okay to say welcome to the party but that is not my thing still we have much in common.
As I sit here and read the many comments, I have to wonder if any of you actually read what you write. People in the military have written that it is about the lack of trust or the diversion created by the gay that should keep them out of the armed forces. I can remember a time not so long ago that blacks, asians and others were thought of as less than equal also. When is anyone going to understand that this is our military and that an enlisted man or woman is there to serve our country. Diversions are present anywhere at anytime, that is why the military has specialized training for the enlisted personnel. It is rigorous and if you can’t handle it, you and your superiors will know it.
As for the letter President O’Bama sent to the young lady, it was a gesture from our military leader letting her know that her plea had not gone unnoticed. And yet here you all sit bantering about it, trying to find fault in it, acting as if the man has no right to reach out to Americans.
You need to take it for what it is worth. Instead of trying to make some big hairy deal out of it, look at the intention and the explanation given for the hold up on action. He neither mislead her nor made her believe that he alone could change things.
A big part of the reason that America is the way it is today is because you all have to find reason to hate, call names, be prejudiced and in general, act like adults. Can’t say that you act like two year olds, because they have not been turned into hateful, bigotted, uncaring people at that age. There will always be someone different in some way from me that I may have to stand next to, but I will know that I am different from them also. We are all Americans, even yet, we are all humans, with enough problems to deal with.
A letter from the President is not something to agrue about, it’s about time we got letters from the man who hopes to serve US while he is in office. Not just men or women, not just white, black, yellow or red, but AMERICANS. That should give us hope also. As for the comment that was made about him REacting to things after the fact, he is aware of the many issues concerning our country today. If he did not react when someone questioned him about an issue, THAT is when I would be worried.
May 9th, 2009 at 6:59 pmNow this is laughable.Do only gays comment on this site?Soldiers going to war n a guy has 2 cover his ass cos the other guy has an erection in the bathroom.Thats crazy,homosexuality is an accepted psychological problem n we have 2 see it as that.Oughta be in the madhouse.Tell obama 2 try telling that to the Egyptian armed forces let’s see wat sharia says about faggots.There is no place for gays in the armed forces,maybe obama could tell his girls 2 try n be lesbians to show how open he is to the idea.
May 9th, 2009 at 7:00 pmif being homo is an accepted psychological problem shouldn’t they make a pill to fix it. i wish they would they did for ADD
May 9th, 2009 at 7:02 pmLikewise, louie123, I did not consent to the opinions or poor language skills you expressed in this thread, nor did you consent to mine. That does not mean either of us should be punished by anyone.
While you do have a point about not liking it when someone “checks you out,” the obvious solution to that is for the attracted party to show responsibility and not check out the attracting party.
In that context, it is true that I express the opinion that men and women could shower together if they do so responsibly. If someone is uncomfortable being “checked out” by another person, they should express their discomfort and request the end of the “checking out.” Should the attracted party continue despite the wishes of the attracting, the attracted should be cited for sexual harassment (or worse, if a worse action is committed). Likewise, the attracting party should not act under false accusations if the attracted acts according to the other’s wishes.
May 9th, 2009 at 7:10 pmHardly any of these comments focus on equal rights at all.
Louie123 and others are just expressing their intolerance towards gays at all (not just the military). I thought we were past that, clearly not.
May 9th, 2009 at 7:11 pmConsider your lures. Do we make a pill for hard-on small towners?
May 9th, 2009 at 7:11 pmObama is the problem, not the solution. Everyone that argues against this is most certainly trying to take my money so they can have their social program without having to work.
As far as the gay guy, I don’t have objections to it. But what about who he is working along. You convey that people have the right to express their opinions and yet when certain affiliates do, their racist, or bigots. So don’t get shocked when certain ‘people’ die in the war from a gun shot in the back of the head.
Remember, you do have freedom of speech. But, you don’t have freedom of consequences. I hope you all enjoyed this article. I made a poem I’d like to share. I’ll eventually revise it.
Ask a Democrat
I was talking to a Democrat
I told him I’m a 912 Fan
You are racist he states
It’s all about Obama the president
I said it is about Sovereignty
Debt, despair, and prosperity
Not of color, creed, or gender
For the good of nation, I ponder
So I continued to explain
The two party groups is insane
Sovereign is supreme lawmaking authority
This gives everyone liberty
He says, don’t you watch TV
Everyone is aboard including me
You’re racist and that is all I can say
There are people we owe: must repay
You, Dem, trying to deter
May 9th, 2009 at 7:31 pmTrying to divide and concur
But I’m not going to ask you
You’re playing games I’m not into
God is still here and God is still in control
May 9th, 2009 at 7:38 pmI am glad to see that this will be repealed. While I am not gay, why should that prevent from someone wanting to to defend our country? Only God judges, we should not.
May 9th, 2009 at 8:02 pmThe bottom line here is simply Barack Obama, the president himself expressed his committment to repeal/ change the current rule of the DADT, which he himself believed awkward, unneccessary and inhuman to those who are serving in the military grounds hiding their real gender in their uniforms.We are not debating here sex references and so on and so forth, what matters most is that….the president have the heart of a saint!
May 9th, 2009 at 8:42 pmI am a happily-married heteosexual, Christian female officer in the military. However, it’s not about letting homosexuals into the military. They are already serving in our military and have always served since DAY#1. If we didn’t want gays in the military, we would force people to admit their sexuality and fire all the heterosexuals. However, we dare not do that becuase these men/women are accomplished senior-level experienced officers and enlisted in all branches of our military, government, and community The issue about their job security and their ability to continue to honorably serve their country despite what they do behind closed doors. They’ve kept their lifestyle hidden and private thus far, a lift on the current law will not make their private lives more public. Let’s not GET STUCK ON STUPID, there are plenty of immoral heterosexuals out there
May 9th, 2009 at 8:47 pmIn 1994 another liberal, President William Jefferson Clinton attempted to openly integrate homosexuals into the naval and military forces of the United States. The upheaval it caused throughout our ranks resulted in a compromise which many of us felt lowered the standards of personal conduct and impacted negatively on the moral framework of the armed forces. This compromise was the (so-called) Don’t ask don’t tell policy. Clintons action had a negative impact on retention at all levels. If Obama doe’s indeed allow homosexuals to openly serve he will also be the first president in three decades to utilize the draft in an effort to fill the ranks of what is now an effective and well trained all volunteer force. And yes, I am totaly against homsexuals serving openly or otherwise in the armed forces of the U.S.
May 9th, 2009 at 8:57 pmWhat I find astounding is that some people who have posted regarding the GOP on this issue is that PRESIDENT CLINTON enacted the “DADT” policy, NOT the GOP, not the either of the Bushes. This policy was a huge flop & this was Clinton’s legacy.
WHY aren’t people well versed on this???
May 9th, 2009 at 9:19 pmI would like to see an all fag military and a normal military. I’m sure the first wouldn’t last long. I cannot believe how stupid liberals can be. This country has gone to shit.
May 9th, 2009 at 9:29 pmTo our esteemed military service members: Some of you posting here have forgotten your place. You are voluntary and paid tools in the service of Us, the rest of the US Americans. This country does not live under military rule. You do not tell Us how you will perform your duties; We tell you.
You are property of the US Government, which is, Us.
When We tell you you will serve with gay men, lesbians, or Martians without differentiation or discrimination, you will do so, without argument.
May 9th, 2009 at 10:15 pmWiley says:
Recruitment has been so low that criminals are being allowed in the military. I’d rather have more non-criminal gays serving openly and no gang-bangers or white supremists.
I’m not sure where you are getting your facts from wiley but as a military recruiter you are dead wrong. Recruitment is at an all time high for some of us. You can barely get in with a misdemeanor now so please take that weak A$$ argument back to the drawing board and get your facts straight.
May 9th, 2009 at 10:19 pmHow is it, in all of these posts that I’ve seen, a mental health issue has been elevated to the status of protected class? Uh oh, have i hit a nerve somewhere? Did someone notice that the king really has no clothes?
May 9th, 2009 at 10:25 pmNow I know why the war is being lost in recent times!
May 9th, 2009 at 10:26 pmLoss of concentration!
Seems most Soldiers are more occupied with identifying and being identified as “the next arse-hole to hump”! Hmmm,a case of the about-to-get-lost dog that would not listen the hunter’s whistle!
This man is AMAZING and we are in an amazing time!
May 9th, 2009 at 10:33 pmWe don’t want homosexuals in the military. Their abnormal and deviant behavior make them unfit for military service and have an adverse impact on morale. This is another disgusting reason that this President will prove to be a big failure.
May 9th, 2009 at 10:40 pmLook, few here really seem to know what they’re talking about. Before you say that it would destroy the military, check with Canada, the UK, Germany and just about the rest of NATO. What you don’t understand is that gay/lesbian people range in behavior as much as any other group. The kind of gay/lesbian who would choose to serve is highly motivated and not looking as the military as some sort of wonderful place to extend their private life. I am gay and was a Naval officer for 7 years, including 2 years in the Mekong Delta. I took hundreds of showers. Believe me, sex was about the last thing I thought of. We had work (real work) and real dangers that didn’t leave much mental room for anyting else.
May 9th, 2009 at 10:49 pmDon’t forget that the whole military ban on homosexuality didn’t exist until the 40s. We fought the Civil War, the Spanish American War and the First World War without such a ban so don’t tell me that dropping it would destroy the military. Oh and yes, I am a strong Republican too.
yeahuhuh Says:
To our esteemed military service members: Some of you posting here have forgotten your place. You are voluntary and paid tools in the service of Us, the rest of the US Americans. This country does not live under military rule. You do not tell Us how you will perform your duties; We tell you.
You are property of the US Government, which is, Us.
When We tell you you will serve with gay men, lesbians, or Martians without differentiation or discrimination, you will do so, without argument.
May 9th, 2009 at 10:51 pmI think you have forgotten your place! I volunteered yes, that is true! But that was because of people like yourself are too scared. US, since you used that so many times, as a military have fought and died so that you can have the right to make retarded comments like that. Yes I am paid by the tax payers but I also pay my taxes so I have the right to say who I want fighting at my side and since you are to scared to do that please step off of the pedestal you put yourself on.
Wiley…
When I was still in the reception station before boot camp our replacements for KP didn’t appear and I realized the army was disorganized and flaky. It was far worse than I had considered: our troops don’t always even know how to use their equipment.
Marching in low quarters; you endured a lot.
So your too-large shoes still allowed you to walk long enough to ruin your body even more than my too-small boots did. It’s unfortunate you were so obedient as to not inform someone of your discomfort, because they probably would have corrected it as did my drill-sergeant. They aren’t all apathetic: they’re just incompetent. But they do get lucky on occasion.
“The sexual orientation of the person handing out the shoes is irrelevant.”
Meaning you know that if you were in a position to probably ensure some man who appealed to you returned and you could get away with putting your hand on his thigh you wouldn’t? How can you be so sure?
“2Bfair, there may be something to the endocrine disrupting chemicals and sexual orientation, but there were gays long before those chemicals were manufactured.”
‘those chemicals’ I mean, the many that keep us alive and functioning normally when they’re in their correct proportions, have been there for as long as humans have been alive, and long before we evolved to homo sapiens. I wasn’t talking Monsanto or Dupont.
Possibly, the first homosexual mentioned in the Bible might have been Noah’s son, Ham, to explain why he was banished. I don’t yet know how the Bible’s 4004 BC creation date works with the 3.6(?) million years of the Laetoli footprints.
“A lot of women have discovered that they cannot have children because they have internal testes instead of ovaries. But they have always identified themselves as female and were heterosexual.”
How did they learn they had testes? Possibly from a medical examination to learn why they were sterile, by chance, because their external genitalia were female and so they had been reared as if they were, naturally, female?
May 9th, 2009 at 10:52 pmPlease people…It was under Clinton that this policy was started…ahhh lets see because he did not have the guts to go either way….If you are gay in the military..serve and shut up…none of us want to hear about your homelife..That is about like me
May 9th, 2009 at 11:00 pmserving and going in to the Commanders Office and saying:
Hey I just want everyone in here to know that I have sex with women..I can’t keep it inside any longer so I need to tell it even if I lose my job and all my benefits….HELLO
I call that stupid…. you don’t hear all the straight people
blabbing everything they do at home…GAYS need to hear this..
about 75% of ya…we don’t want to hear about it…get on with life…half of the world would care zip about it if theydid not get it crammed down our throats all day….
Be gay if you want…….but no one wants to hear it….geez
There are more pressing things going on in the US..ahhh like poverty, childabuse, it does not even stack up to measure
GET over yourselves! And for those of you who put this poor me gay, poor me up to things like slavery and racial discriminations of the past..get a life people!!!
Okay, I have spent a couple hours reading the comments and as an Army Wife I would like to put in my two cents. I do believe that homosexuals are being discriminated against and that that is an unfair action, but in the case of the actual article that we are commenting on, this woman basically committed career suicide and is being rewarded for it. The policy is DONT ASK DONT TELL! She told. Automatic termination of duty. Point blank. The DADT policy being revoked may be a good thing, but I am sure that it will cause a lot of problems in the first couple of years (AT LEAST) inside the military. IF it is revoked, there should be seperate barracks and accomodations of EQUAL QUALITY to those of others, that are especially for homosexuals. That way there is less chance of false OR TRUE sexual harrasment issues. This protects the homosexuals rights and those of the heterosexuals.
But now for another issue that Obama needs to address….
May 9th, 2009 at 11:02 pmI was going to enlist in the military as soon as I turned 18 years old but I could not have the job that I wanted (Combat Engineer) because I was a female. Females are not supposed to be in Combat positions. BUT there are tons of females in Iraq that are serving in our armed forces. My husband’s unit’s supply SGT is a female and the guys think she is cool but will not hang out with her because she is female and the wives back home may have a problem with it. That is an unfair situation for her to be put in. They should keep the female members stateside so that there is not a problem with these instances. The previous supply SGT was also female and got kicked back to the US because she was “having relations” with some of the married soldiers so now most of the wives of our unit are worried about the new one. That is unfair to her. I know it is off subject but I just wanted to put that out there and see what everyone thought. I am not trying to start a controversy I just think that a female soldier should remain stateside, so that not only are they not put in an awkward situation but also the wives are not in an uneasy situation by wondering what is going on over there. I fully trust my husband but I receive calls from other wives all of the time that are worried. And I don’t have a problem with females being over there, don’t get me wrong I appreciate them as much if not more as the guys, but I do think that it may be unfair to them.
And Kalli……Your the moron not the previous president…
May 9th, 2009 at 11:03 pmget real..a signed letter?…if he really wanted to do something about it he would…he can’t even stand gays..you guys are all ignorant…HELLO wake up. He is just pacifying
ya cause you voted for him…SUCKERS…I am shocked at your ignorance
Helloooooo Barney Frank gives the US a reason to laugh..get real ..no on e is taking this gay serious…Please
I guess I should say that Washington takes us for stupid…they throw a line out to whoever will listen..GAY Straight..Christian..Sinner..Dem or Rep…Whatever will keep them in office collecting their benefits…makes me sick
May 9th, 2009 at 11:08 pmThe reason there were homo’s in the Bible is because there is defilement throughout history…
Look at Perez Hilton..Please people..that is sickening…
I have a gay male friend who is married to another guy
and they are very nice and have 2 children..Neither one of them looks and acts sissy like Perez ..Ugggghhh. If your gonna be gay…be gay and keep it at home..we don’t want to hear it….you would not have near as much hassle if you did not cram it down everyones throat
Whatever is up with that sissy stuff…
May 9th, 2009 at 11:12 pmIf this country, and it may be too late, does not turn its eyes back to God it will soon fall hard. GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!
May 9th, 2009 at 11:32 pm@ will82 (#277): Thank you for validating my comment.
You might want to check with your officers for an update on exactly what rights you have while enlisted, and who you (all) are obligated to as tools of the citizenry.
What you call a “pedestal”, which is your responsibility to me as a civilian, was created in law long ago. I cannot take the credit for that.
There are no facts in your reply. Your half-quotes of recruiter/seargent propaganda are not an argument.
May 9th, 2009 at 11:33 pmyeahuhuh, although you attempt to sound educated, I do know the rights of the enlisted as I am required to read them to everyone who is enlisting, we as a military are required to protect the american public but in no way are we slaves to the citizenry as you have made it clear that that is what you think. I have this same discussion 100 times a week and it makes me laugh at how people like yourself believe that United States military are a bunch of brainless zombies that are at the whim of uneducated people like yourself.
May 9th, 2009 at 11:44 pmI’m sorry, but I serve & it would make me uncomfortable to know the status of someone’s preference. We gotta share a little too much, but it’s complete insanity to let it be so known. I wouldn’t have a problem if they were to act subtle, but it usually ends up in a battle between the gay community & the straight community. As it is, we got 1% of the American population in the military. Yeah, some things just need to be kept outside of the military grounds. I work for a police department & I hate to come into my locker room & find literature about “coming out.” I don’t impose my beliefs about religion or sex preference on others, but seeing that just makes me very uncomfortable. I can’t change in the locker room…some will just stare at you without regard. I speak from experience and the military needs to leave it out. Also, people know that if you want to get out of the military…all you have to do is say that & soon you get discharged. It’s not like people are pushed any way or the other anyways, so why do we need to put a label to our selves? I just want to concentrate in serving & avoid the uncomfortable settings that I’m exposed as a police officer. As a military reservists the service becomes my second home & I just want to be comfortable & concentrate on the mission. I don’t display my preferences, I don’t others to make it an uncomfortable setting either.
May 9th, 2009 at 11:49 pmgovernment report on gangs in the military
link
link
May 9th, 2009 at 11:53 pmI only read about halfway down the comments, but I feel like I need to throw something in here- sorry if I’m repeating what someone else said.
First of all, they still ask you if you’re homo when you join the military- so it’s not like DADT does anything there (I just went to MEPS last week, so you can’t call me a liar. I answered the question myself).
Second of all, all these people that are complaining about being in the service with gays because of awkwardness in the showers or the ‘gay behavior’ need to realize something. Mostly that- duh- you’re not allowed to act straight when you’re on duty, why would you be allowed to act gay? Next up- straight people look at you in the shower, and it’s not awkward. Gay people look at you for the same reason the straight people do, and its awkward just because they find the general shape of your body parts attractive? MOST PEOPLE DO, just not on a scale enough to matter. You can’t tell me that you’ve never looked at another person in the changing room just out of curiosity or comparison.
I would be happy that Obama is trying to change this. If people leave or refuse to join because of the gays, well, they need to realize that they’re discriminating bastards, just like the people that won’t join because there are blacks in the military. We have to start somewhere.
But seriously people, ‘I don’t want there to be gay stuff going on around me while I’m working!’ Oh shut up. If you, sir, are not allowed to kiss a girl, why would the sir next to you be allowed to kiss a boy?
May 9th, 2009 at 11:55 pmWiley I see you brought references to your argument. Great job!! Maybe you should take a look at the years listed on those documents and realize that it is 2009! The issues with the DADT policy is now not years ago like your references are. I have no problem with gays in the military, I just don’t want to know about it, keep it to yourself and I will keep my sex life to myself. How hard is that?
May 9th, 2009 at 11:58 pm“God bless America”, “In God we Trust”..are two phrases that would remind anyone of America.
Generally speaking, America is considered a “Christian nation” (remember the hoopla it caused when there was suggestion that POTUS-Obama was a MUSLIM? – nothing against Muslims here).
Now, if the above assumptions are correct,indulge me to take a different approach to this homosexuality subject.
Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan… are predominantly Muslim countries and as such, live by the moral tenets of the Quaran and teachings of Prophet Muhammed.
By which ‘tenets’ and whose ‘teachings’ does a Christian America live by?
Okay, there are also Muslims in America but even Islam forbids Homosexuality, what about Christianity?
As a selfish and self-centered people, we like to “eat our cake and have it at the same time“! How?
We are either Christians or not (it is allowed to be Muslim, or even Pagans/Atheist). If we went as far as inscribing “God” on, and in our essence as a nation, then that means we recognize the presence and sovereignty of God.
Having said that, WHAT is God’s position on Homosexuality and should it matter to us as a nation and a people that believe in God?
Yes, we are FREE to choose our lifestyle, God gave us a brain and mind because he wants us to make decisions and not be a robot (just like we give our children the liberty to decide for themselves but as “loving and more experienced” parents, we GUIDE them)
….Be free but do not use your freedom to “indulge in sinful nature” (Galatians 5:13).
So, are we carrying this “freedom thing” to a new level, in this generation?
I understand you if you claim you dont believe in God, Paganism and Atheism is an option but it is certainly not “American”! Though we are tolerant of ‘other beliefs’, we are still a christian nation and thats why people were concerned about Obama’s “spiritual mentor”, in the days of the campaign and even now, they are still concerned about “How he observes” the day of national prayer!
Without any iota of doubt, the Bible is the “standard, dictionary and yardstick” of any professed christian individual/people/nation, when it comes to moral issues.
The Bible says “God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites; fe(males) changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature…and became “violently inflamed” in their lust towards their ‘kind’,working what is obscene…(Romans 1:24-27)
Again, Bible says “a man” should not lie with another man, as one lies with a woman; that is detestable” (Levictus 18:22)..and verse 23 goes on to say “do not have sexual relations with an animal and defile yourself with it” (Bestiality).
Also, Bible recounts that “..all the men of city of Sodom surrounded the house saying, ‘Bring the men who came to you out so that we can have sex with them,….No my friends, do not do this WICKED thing..(Genesis 19:5-7,) ..and Verse 11- says “and they (the Angels) struck the men at the door with blindness”…Verse 24 points out: “Then the Lord rained down burning Sulfur on Sodom (Sodomy => Homosexuality) and Gomorrah, from out of the heavens”.
Finally, in Jude verse 7, the Bible reminds us that “Sodom and Gomorrah (and the surrounding towns) gave themselves up to
sexual immorality and perversion…they serve as example of those who suffered the punishment of eternal fire.
do those scenarios seem ‘very familiar’ to all of us right now, ain’t it?
..and those are not my words but the “Dictionary” of Christians, the Holy Bible!
Just like it became widespread and acceptable in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah, Sodomy is becoming a style in present day America and its even becoming a taboo to speak-out against it because the practitioners are gaining ground and if you do, you get labeled a ‘bigot’, a ‘hater’, ‘intolerant’, ‘old-fashioned’ and all sorts of ‘well-oiled’ adjectives designed to ensure that good men who still believe that God’s word is law,must keep quiet! Its a strategy that is working, taking advantage of a few strategically placed “sympathetic judges” and “political jobbers”, to do the dirty work!
They worst thing is that they are not even satisfied in being the pervert that they are, they want to teach our kids how to “be like them”, in our schools! They want to turn our military to another “pervert institution”!
Ofcourse, God who designed marriage between man and woman, and asked them to multiply and be fruitful (Genesis 1:28, 9:1) knew what HE was doing but the queer humans amongst us also wanted to raise a “generation for their pervert ways” by adopting children given birth-to, by “straight people” who are ‘doing it’ as God has commanded (why dont they just have their own children through their frigin, anal intercourse?)…
This is further proof, of the futility of their behavior but then, the ruler of this earth has blinded their inner eyes that they may not see the light of God.
“A great civilization is not destroyed from the outside, except it first destroys itself from the inside”!
“God bless America”, because “In God we trust”.
People, let us go back to the ideals that made us a great nation, let us stop abusing the same freedom for which our grand fathers spilled their blood in the battle field, that we may live freely but not using our freedom to indulge in all manners of sinfulness.
Thank you and God bless America.
PS: Call me names if you wish, abuse me if you must but let it be known to you that l spoke the truth…Righteousness exalts a nation but….
May 10th, 2009 at 12:10 amThere is no room for gays in the military and for that matter in society at large…
Gays are an abomination of human life, same as their supporter Obama whom, we currently have as President.
He ought to concentrate more on funding abortions which he currently supports instead of meddling in military matters.
Better yet, he should concentrate on finding a new occupation after getting kicked out of office which, he will inevitability be, especially after sucking up to AIG, Wall Street all while playing hard ball with 5 million blue collared auto-workers!
He’s evil wrapped in human form and deserves what ever he’s rewarded with at the polls for the sanctioned killing of infants!!
Him and his ugly wife should rot in hell….
May 10th, 2009 at 12:20 amTo the idiot who just went though MEPS commenting about seeing someone naked in the shower; you’re a moron.
Its not about comparing body parts. Its about having to deal with someone that thinks in such a skewed way that it could get you killed… They’re more focused on their next sex act than what it takes to complete a mission or save the life of a comrade!
Believe me, I work in law enforcement and serve in the military and every gay person ( that i know of) in that line of work and believe me, there are plenty, are all off their rockers in one way shape or form…
Homo marriages are the best thing that could ever happen to divorce lawyers, they are all off their rockers and all gay marriages are doomed to failure the same as the Obama presidency!
May God help us all!!!
May 10th, 2009 at 12:29 amwil82 Says:
yeahuhuh, although you attempt to sound educated, I do know the rights of the enlisted as I am required to read them to everyone who is enlisting, we as a military are required to protect the american public but in no way are we slaves to the citizenry as you have made it clear that that is what you think. I have this same discussion 100 times a week and it makes me laugh at how people like yourself believe that United States military are a bunch of brainless zombies that are at the whim of uneducated people like yourself.
You (again) state no facts arguing my position, just accusations and name-calling, like a frightened child.
/wasting time
May 10th, 2009 at 12:33 amYou’re the recruiter. Why don’t you link me up with the document showing that the armed forces have raised their criteria for recruiting, and stopped with the moral waiver? Show me that they’ve solved the problems of gang-bangers, and gang-banger stealing and selling military equipment.
High unemployment leads to more enlistment, sure. Hope that means that more trainable people are entering, but it’s easier to get a lot of morons with behavioral problems that will wash out.
May 10th, 2009 at 12:53 amI have nothing against Gays or Gay marraiges or whatever they do during their personal time. I am originally from Massachusetts and thought that Gay marraige wasnt a bad idea. For Gays, im sure, this is their “Radical 60’s movement”. They are trying to over come their own type of segragation and i applaud them for it.
That being said…
I believe that the “Dont ask, Dont tell” policy that is in place is the best way to handle the situation of Gays and Lesbians serving in the Armed Forces at this moment in time.
You may be either for Gays in the Armed Forces or Against Gays in the Armed forces. The latter is where the problem is.
Unfortunantly we have biggots, sexists, homofobes, racists, gang bangers, and all sorts of characters serving in the Army. If Gay service members were allowed to serve openly, they would face more dangerous situations then they would if they kept quite and served in iraq.
Not only would these service members risk their lives down range, they would also be risking their well being while serving state side.
Think about it. We train as we fight, and that includes intense training with loaded weapons. If there were a openly Gay Soldier in a unit and there was another Soldier who was raised and brainwashed into hating Gays with the utmost passion… that gay Soldier would be at an extreme risk. It only takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.
Believe me, I serve with some of the greatest Americans of our generation, but for every 100 superior Soldiers, there is at least 1 who has no business protection our country. And it only takes 1 to end someones life.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:03 amHigh unemployment leads to more enlistment, sure. Hope that means that more trainable people are entering, but it’s easier to get a lot of morons with behavioral problems that will wash out.
Wiley…. unfortunatly with two wars going on, Soldiers arent being “washed out”. Those with behavorial problems are being kept in… just placed in “low risk” positions. but these Soldiers still have access to weapons and ammo. Its unfortunate but just how it is.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:06 amI say, get rid of the bad apples who are raping our women soldiers—before they kill their wives.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:09 amHey buddy, its not that easy. Its a horrible thing, but thats the way the army is right now. I was deployed twice in four years and believe me, each time you come back, your not the same person that you were when you left.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:17 amPluse in reguards to raping female soldiers and killing wives… rape happens in normal society and itll happen in the military as well. its something that we can only educate our soldiers on but its impossible to prevent. and Soldiers killing there wives… its the most horrible thing that could happen, but Soldiers are human beings and have complex emotions. we are not robots. So if a Soldier comes back from being shot at and blown up every day in iraq, to find his wife sleeping with another man then guess what may happen.
its horrible and we do our best to educate and train soldiers to deal with these situations… but my friend… i wish i could tell you how many Soldiers i have known that have come home to find their homes and bank accounts empty, and their wives gone.
I’m a veteran. I’m a woman. And I don’t buy it.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:23 amI am a SSG (E-6) in the Military Police Corp and believe me, i have seen the worst of the worst when it comes to Army society.
Buy it or not, its the truth.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:27 amWhile serving in the Navy under DADT, I had the displeasure of witnessing a fair-haired young seaman receiving a “wake-up-call” by having a dick shoved in his mouth. Nothing was done because the perp was a seal. How much worse will this be if our young men have to share a shower with someone more interested in their ass than the enemy????
May 10th, 2009 at 1:37 amwiley Says:
If I could put up with having to tell almost every man I served with to stop talking to my tits, you guys can brave the f^cking showers. Really.
I can handle a woman talking to the bulge in my pants – even enjoy it if I find her attactive. But when a woman I’d never want sex with (or man – none of whom I’d ever want sex with) grabs it — it is a TOTALLY different matter. Talk to the bulge (chest or crotch); BUT imply you “want” it, no way I share a fox hole. Regardless if you are male or female.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:06 amRemember Israel’s lesson of the 1967 war. The (male) ememy fought hardest against the female Israelites because to be killed by them was almost as bad as being killed by a fag. What kind of virgins could they expect in heaven….
link
May 10th, 2009 at 2:25 amArmy MSG Ret. and proud that the United States never put me in a position with a fag at my back, no pun intended. The last thing I want to rely on is some sissy crying pussy boy that wanted to join up to look at someone else’s dick.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:25 amWere it so that I found one of my people were Gay they would being picking there pebbles up off the floor.
I would also not hesitate to place them in point position with a bayonet for protection. I would tell him he needed to use stealth and not a weapon which would give away his position. It would all be logically received by the higher up command when the body bag came back full.
Need I say more, the military is not the place for twinkle toes and fudge packers in my unit. Combat infantry does not have time to nurse maid a crying momma boys wearing pink laced under panties in combat.
I’m glad, I do not have to make the decision anymore to protect my men from transvestite, homosexuals Fags, Lesbians people that normally should not be in the military.
I can see one of them becoming a prisoner of war and the enemy wants information so they use another fag to induce them into giving information on their unit for pleasure of sex.
Homosexuals are a scourge on society in civilian life but other lives are not at stake. Soldiers lives are more important then being politically correct.
I remember hearing about allot of suicides in the military these past few years. Allow queers to opening admit they are queer and it is a whole new ballgame.
It would be a disgrace to America to ‘allow’ homosexuals this freedom. They shouldn’t even be allowed in the military at all. For Heaven’s sake! Read the Holy Bible!!! It is an abomination unto God!!! Jesus is coming again and everyone will be judged. I pray to God that the president is a christian! Pray for our president and our country!!
May 10th, 2009 at 2:33 amstormn00007 Says:
I find your mindset offensive. I’m quite happy that I never served under you when I was in the Air Force. Your post indicates a great deal of ignorance about gay people, and you seem to “understand” quite a lot of erroneous, bigoted lies.
In fact, the only thing that could give me comfort about your post is to learn that you are just kidding, and you were making a poor attempt at pretending to be an ignorant, homophobic “tough guy”.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:33 am“While serving in the Navy under DADT, I had the displeasure of witnessing a fair-haired young seaman receiving a “wake-up-call” by having a dick shoved in his mouth. Nothing was done because the perp was a seal. How much worse will this be if our young men have to share a shower with someone more interested in their ass than the enemy????”
I’m sorry, but this post makes no sense to me. “Nothing was done because the perp was a seal.” Does this mean that no one stopped the ‘perp’ from forcing himself on the ‘fair-haired young seaman’, or that no one reported him, or what? Was nothing done because he was a seal, and therefore valuable, or because he was a seal, and therefore could be dangerous to those who stopped him or reported him?
And, back to DADT, if this ‘perp’ was able to force himself on a ‘fair-haired young seaman’ while under DADT, thereby demonstrating that he was more interested in his fellow seamen than the enemy, why would it be so much worse if gays were allowed to serve “openly”* in the military?
*I dislike using the term “openly”, because to me this implies that gays who are in the military would automatically tell everyone that they’re gay, or that they would feel it would be acceptable behavior to force themselves on one of their fellows, simply because a law had been changed.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:33 amI don’t like the term “openly gay soldiers” either. I prefer to just call them “soldiers”.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:35 amtattersgal Says:
It would be a disgrace to America to ‘allow’ homosexuals this freedom. They shouldn’t even be allowed in the military at all. For Heaven’s sake! Read the Holy Bible!!! It is an abomination unto God!!! Jesus is coming again and everyone will be judged. I pray to God that the president is a christian! Pray for our president and our country!!
Well, I just hope for your sake that you aren’t wearing a dress made from two different cloths, because the penalty would be the same.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:38 amI also wonder if possibly Obama himself may not have participated in some homosexual conduct that leads him to feel so strongly about homosexuality.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:45 amIt would seem also that many the schools in the USA have been pushing this in the classrooms unabated for years. Two mommies as partners. Two daddies as as partners. I think it is only right if you are going to teach children about these relationships, then tell them the two mommies are licking each others vagina’s. The two men are cock suckers and screw each other in the ass, where they are suppose to shit from. Why all the pussyfooting around?
You think society is protecting its children by allowing them to grow up believing this is a normal relationship?
The United States is just like Babylon and we know what happened there.
Barney Franks the FAG and his ilk in Congress and the Senate are a bunch of retards. Demon_Rats are now running the government of the United States. The United States is in a sorry state of compromise. Will the Republic survive this inexperience menace Obama to our Country?
Wow…My Commander in Chief wrote a letter to a Soldier. Well I guess that promises change. He promised to get us troops out of Iraq..Well he did that to! Now we are going to Afghanistan. I got a good idea, since this issue effects us Soldiers and not all of you civilians with great ideas, why don’t you let us decide! When will you ever learn, just becuase a politician promises something, doesn’t mean it will happen. Why don’t you tread all over the rest of my Christian values while you are at it. Oh yes because in America our rights are protected, we have the right to do/be whatever we want….as long as your not a Christian with morals. I know I know that makes me an intolarant, bigot, racist, gun owning dumb*ss! Well since I am sitting over here in Iraq defending your rights…I guess I will feel free to speak mine. If you have never had the balls to serve in the military don’t preach about a subject you know nothing about. Let me and my brother and sister Soldiers, Marines, Airmen, Sailors, and Coasties decide. While it is true that the President is our CIC, he needs to make a descision that best serves the WHOLE military and not a few homosexuals who LIED, yes LIED to get into the military, where is the honor in that!
May 10th, 2009 at 2:57 am“…not a few homosexuals who LIED, yes LIED to get into the military, where is the honor in that!”
If the policy is “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, then to whom did they lie “to get into the military”?
My uncle served in the Navy in WWII. He served most of his long career aboard submarines, mementos from his travels collected during his service were donated to the Naval Museum, and he is buried in Arlington. He lied to get into the Navy, he was only 17. Was he a dishonorable man for lying about his age to get into the Navy?
May 10th, 2009 at 3:48 amstormn00007 Says:
Either you are trying to be some kind of parody or you are one seriously misinformed person.
I also wonder if possibly Obama himself may not have participated in some homosexual conduct that leads him to feel so strongly about homosexuality.
Why would you wonder something like that?
It would seem also that many the schools in the USA have been pushing this in the classrooms unabated for years. Two mommies as partners. Two daddies as as partners.
I would say that’s because many of the children in all those schools in the USA have two mommies or two daddies. And the vast majority of the time, there is nothing wrong with those kids that wouldn’t be wrong with a kid with a mommy and a daddy (married or not.)
I think it is only right if you are going to teach children about these relationships, then tell them the two mommies are licking each others vagina’s. The two men are cock suckers and screw each other in the ass, where they are suppose to shit from. Why all the pussyfooting around?
You think society is protecting its children by allowing them to grow up believing this is a normal relationship?
And you would have the kids taught how a man and a woman have sex using the same terminology? Do you consider it repulsive when a man and a woman engage in oral sex? What about anal sex between a man and a woman? Are they also forbidden? Says who?
The United States is just like Babylon and we know what happened there.
Actually I don’t. I know it ended badly for somebody, but I was never clear on the details. Wasn’t really one of the parts of the Bible story that grabbed my interest.
Barney Franks the FAG and his ilk in Congress and the Senate are a bunch of retards. Demon_Rats are now running the government of the United States. The United States is in a sorry state of compromise.
Really now? “FAG”, “retards”, and “Demon_Rats”? Are we supposed to be impressed by this? And what exactly do you mean by a “sorry state of compromise”?
Will the Republic survive this inexperience menace Obama to our Country?
Should we be hearing Tocata and Fugue in D Minor about now? And an announcer asking (in dark tones), “And just what the hell does that mean? Tune in next week to find out!”
May 10th, 2009 at 3:53 amMa’am,
They violated the DADT……it was a lie when they came out! BC military doctrine is DADT…Homosexuals are not allowed to serve!!!!!
May 10th, 2009 at 4:16 amI commend your uncle for serving. He is a true hero…as our all the men and women who serve honorably. But DADT is exactly that We don’t ask you don’t tell!! Get it??
Also just because someone in your family served honorably does not give you the right to tell us WHO ARE SERVING how we should live our lives. DADT is a law…it should be enforced until the day it is changed..hopefully that day never comes.
Until you are freezing your buns off in a foxhole in Korea..or sweating half to death wearing 50 extra pounds of gear on patrol in Iraq do not try to tell us how to live. From torture to homosexuals every American who NEVER served wants to pound on their chest and dictate tactics and policy to those of us serving. Wow look at that I have managed to state my opinion without using profanity! Cool huh!(others here may want to try it). The Army life is live by 7 Core Values: Loyalty, Duty,Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. Until the DADT policy is repealed(Again I hope it isn’t). Homosexuals in the Army, violate every value. I realize Soldiers violate these values on a daily basis, but we as Soldiers strive to maintain them.
Let me clarify my statement “ALLOWED TO SERVE OPENLY!”
May 10th, 2009 at 4:22 amIt seems the President could apply a two-prong approach to fulfilling his commitment to repeal DADT: Because the policy has been enacted as law (10 USC 654), one prong should be to pursue legislation to repeal and replace this section of code with a policy of non-discrimination. Doing so would make it harder for a subsequent President to undo, but would obviously require congressional action and will therefore take time to accomplish.
In the short term, a second prong of the approach should be to require the Department of Defense to change the underlying procedure for investigating homosexuality and processing service members for separation. 10 USC 654(b) states: “(b) Policy.— A member of the armed forces shall be separated from the armed forces under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense if one or more of the following findings is made and approved in accordance with procedures set forth in such regulations:” Thus, prior to separation, the law requires one or more findings [of homosexuality] to be made and approved in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense – regulations that can be changed without congressional action.
As a result, the President could, for example, require that no such finding be made and/or no such separation be approved without an affirmative certification by the President (or his designee) that separation would be in the best interest of the service. Assuming that, in a time of war, the President (or his designee) would, in most cases withhold certification on the basis that the service member’s continued service would better serve the military than his or her separation, this change would effectively halt discharges based solely on a service member’s sexual preference while still complying with the law.
Taking this step now might actually help prepare the way for later legislation by diffusing some of the controversy. When the legislation does finally appear, it will then merely confirm a change to the policy already in effect.
May 10th, 2009 at 4:58 am“…Also just because someone in your family served honorably does not give you the right to tell us WHO ARE SERVING how we should live our lives…”
“The Army life is live by 7 Core Values: Loyalty, Duty,Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage. Until the DADT policy is repealed(Again I hope it isn’t). Homosexuals in the Army, violate every value. I realize Soldiers violate these values on a daily basis, but we as Soldiers strive to maintain them.”
Soldierboi, I am not telling you or anyone ‘how you should live your lives’. Nor am I claiming that because I have had relatives who served means that I have the right to tell you or anyone ‘how you should live your lives’. I’m simply and respectfully disagreeing with the arguments that you and others here are making. And I truly don’t understand the distinction between straight soldiers violating the Army’s 7 Core Values and homosexuals violating the Army’s 7 Core values.
But that’s a discussion for another time, I have to get some sleep.
Have a good night.
May 10th, 2009 at 5:08 amI don’y really care if people are gay as long as long as they understand that im not gay and leave me be its fine. However from a military point of view there is a logical reason for dont ask dont tell. Just like how woman and the marines have to be seperated cuz of sexual relations could interfer homesexual relations could also interfer. If there were open gays some guys or girls may not feel comfortable showering and living with gay guy or girl. Kinda like how a girl wouldnt want to be showering with strage man they didnt know. The military would have to have showers and areas for woman,men, lesbians and gay men. You can be gay just dont tell them. I mean part of it may be anti-gay but alot of it is logistical. Because of the way we train and live with eachother. I mean im sure we could handle it, eventually it probally will be changed from the looks of whats been going on lately in our country. But im just saying that its not gonna happen quite that easy. We have a war were fighting in, letting gays tell the military there gay probally isn’t the highest thing on the priority list. Anyways good luck and stay strong
May 10th, 2009 at 6:08 amI am in the Army and this is what I think.
May 10th, 2009 at 6:15 amThe person in the article is the reason for a DADT policy. You can serve honorably regardless of your orientation, you are just not allowed to make an issue of it. Most of the posts are trying to do just that. Being in the military must be about serving the country, not some other agenda. The people who chaff at these restrictions have other issues. That detracts from the military’s mission to protect freedom, not practice it.
Jane,
You made me smile. It is very good that you and I can have a civil discussion representing two sides of an argument without name calling or disrespectful language. I don’t think you and I will ever see eye to eye on this, but you are entitled to your opinion. It is refreshing to know that there is a liberal out there that can talk a point without being disrespectful. We will, Agree to disagree! Thanks Jane.
Hooooah!
Devil Dog….I like the way you said what you said. Thanks Leatherneck…Keep up the good work!!!
May 10th, 2009 at 6:18 amHey folks,
lets not diminish from the respect and gratitude we have for our serving men/women; they pay for the freedom we so much enjoy and are quick to abuse!
Having said that, this DADT goes beyond even the military. Its about our core values as a nation, “One Nation under God”
Its about doing right or wrong, its about obedience to the commands of God, its about our very existence.
The “unnatural people” know what they are doing is evil, and they not only want us to keep shut about it but they want to “shove it down everybody throat as well”!
I choose to raise my children in “the respect and knowledge of God”…..(the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, says the Holy Bible) and l hate to think that the schools built with my ‘Tax-money’ is teaching them, behind my back, how it is ‘okay, fashionable and acceptable’ to do what the Bible calls “wicked” in the sight of God.
The only way they can ever parade themselves, shamelessly though, as “having children” so they can have any semblance of being “a parent” (what a joke), is by adopting children of those who obeyed God (or by artificial insemination using a “purchased sperm/egg”)- still very unnatural and against God’s design!
Do we ever know that the Bible is written for our instruction and training?…that we may be found worthy before God?
“Anne and Jane Schnieder” (without any disrespect), have repeatedly shown that they come from a ‘long generation’ of Sodomy! You need to read your Bible, Genesis 19:5-24 and see what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah….or maybe you dont even believe in God and your morals are just dictated by your lust for an arse-hole?
Nobody likes to be labeled ‘a bigot’ which is what you Homos are taking advantage of but l tell you, The Bible says “Friendliness with (the ways of) this world, is enmity with God, you can not serve two masters.
I wonder if Americans still read “The Bible” because if we do, we wouldn’t be here discussing how “arse-diggers” should be allowed to ruin our values, ruin our military, debase our children and collective future.
Freedom to own a gun does not mean you should go around shooting people as you like, that is called abuse of freedom! Freedom entails responsibility!
While we are really trying our best to “accommodate these perverts” in our society, so as to be seen as being tolerant and politically correct, me thinks they should know where to draw the line!
It is unnatural for a man to lust after another man, the victims of these freaky lifestyle needs spiritual help cos thats the only way they can get over it; The Devil has taken control of their soul.
Its not about freedom anymore, its about Evil and Godliness: Every one should choose on whose side they wanana be.
“As for me and my household, we shall serve the Lord”.
…c’mmon, go-on and tell us about how ignorant we are and we dont respect other people’s (evil) choice..go on
May 10th, 2009 at 8:36 amAltho I have the upmost respect for anyone who serves our country, we must take into consideration the opinions of the majority of the men and women of our armed forces. From what I understand, most do not feel comfortable showering and living in close quarters with gays. That is how the majority of the rest of the population thinks, so why force it on them? For you people who think this is a good idea, go live with a few gay men for a few months, shower daily with them, then get back to us.
May 10th, 2009 at 9:03 amFor you people who think this is a good idea, go live with a few gay men for a few months, shower daily with them, then get back to us.
—
May 10th, 2009 at 10:12 amAlready done that. It was no big deal. They knew I was not gay and I respected that they were. I don’t force myself on every woman I know or meet or have ever lived with and I assume you don’t either.
Some comments here are hideous!
May 10th, 2009 at 10:45 amFor full disclosure, maybe we should start identifying our “inclinations” before we post a comment….
With that, one can specifically ’situate and contextualize” such comments.
For me, not in another life can l ever be gay! NO WAY!!
I am an asexual lesbian (meaning I’m emotionally drawn & attached to women but don’t experience sexual attraction of any kind) & was wondering: does DADT apply to people like me? Is it the idea of homosexuality that is objected to or the possibility that advances of some kind will be made by gays in the armed forces?
May 10th, 2009 at 11:20 am#323 – sapphire_407 Says:
———————————————————-
“Altho I have the upmost respect for anyone who serves our country, we must take into consideration the opinions of the majority of the men and women of our armed forces. From what I understand, most do not feel comfortable showering and living in close quarters with gays. That is how the majority of the rest of the population thinks, so why force it on them?”
May 10th, 2009 at 9:03 am
The members of the armed services were not asked for their opinions when they de-segregated the military. There was no loss of unit cohesion when that change was imposed upon them. What makes you think that allowing gay members to serve openly, as they already do in the majority of NATO countries, will cause problems?
May 10th, 2009 at 11:28 am#167 – SSG Anti Gays Says:
———————————————————
“You sympathize with the lowlifes, fine”
May 9th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
But, I do not sympathize with you, therefore I do not sympathize with lowlifes. You, SSgt, are proof that American heterosexual males serving in the military who claim to be unable to serve with openly gay members are largely incapable of controlling youselves. A very sad state of affairs for the US Military.
The only civilian member of the US Air Force who volentered for four year-long terms in Iraq is gay. Too bad you cannot live up to that example.
May 10th, 2009 at 11:40 amOk…Hold it I have the solution to the problem. The CIC gives all of us members of the Armed Forces who do not want Homosexuals in the military the option to get out. The gays are allowed to serve openly. That way the few thousand gays can defend the country and the rest of us who are no longer serving can sit back on the chat sites and critisize their work. Yeah sounds like a DUMB#SS solution to me to!!!!!
May 10th, 2009 at 11:49 amIf I have to be in a shower with a man that is attracted to other men….should I not be allowed to shower with women since I am attracted to them??? You would be pissed if the Army let me shower with your wife and daughter, but it is not the same is it. Or wait we can have 4 latrines: straight male, gay male, straight female, and gay female. Yeah everyone in America has the right to do or be whatever they want. Instead of catering to a few in the minority because they have rights, why don’t we go with the majority. I am a Christian male Soldier, and I admit I am a sinner, and by no means perfect, but I strive on a daily basis to live a good CHRISTIAN life. Although I may stumble, I keep on the path and pray for salvation. Just when I think my life is screwed I look at crap like gays in the military and think, damn my life is better than I thought.
People, every time you flash your girlfriend’s, boyfriend’s, wife’s or husband’s photos. You’re declaring your heterosexuality. Yet a male soldier flashing his bf’s photos will have him discharged. See the discrepancy? BESIDES, DADT IS NOT ONLY APPLIED WHEN ONE’S ON DUTY. WHEN ONE’S OFF-DUTY, CHILLING OUT WITH HIS SAME-SEX PARTNER, ANY COLLEAGUE OF HIS, IF SPOTTING THEM, CAN REPORT IT TO THEIR SUPERIORS. AND ANY SOLDIER WITH AN OUNCE OF INTEGRITY WILL OWN UP HIS “UNLAWFULNESS” WHEN BEING INVESTIGATED, EVEN IF IT MEANS KISSING GOODBYE TO ONE’S MILITARY CAREER. Plz get a grip about the whole picture.
May 10th, 2009 at 12:15 pmIf a large number of American progressives are just as backward thinking as those Western and Central European conservatives, I sincerely shudder to think how American right-wingers might think about gay people.
sit back on the chat sites and critisize their work
May 10th, 2009 at 12:30 pm—-
I haven’t seen anyone do that but I admit I do not read all posts. I wouldn’t even criticize spelling as my typos are way numerous and oft poignant
I just retired from the Air Force, and I can tell you that she was not the only gay person in the military. I’ve seen hundreds of them, and some were “married” to somone of the opposite sex as a cover or a way to leave the dorm/barracks.
As a kid, I was raised as a Christian (and then I grew up and stopped believing those fairy tales) — and taught that gays are MONSTEROUS and “the worst sinners of all”. ALL other sins are “forgivable, blah, blah, blah”…. That hypocrital rationale goes against their belief of loving all people and treating them as you wanted to be treated, right?
There’s been gay ppl in the military, politics, sports, music, arts, film/tv, etc… if they are able to perform their job well, who cares what they do with other 18+ yr old consenting adults? If they pay their taxes, and don’t commit crimes against you or your neighborhood, city, government, etc — why take away one of their empolyment/career opportunities?
Oh, and lastly, there’s one more newsflash…. some of these “Christian, I’m forgiven, going to heaven” ppl have hatred for ppl of other colors and nationalities as well….
May 10th, 2009 at 1:21 pmlastpage Says:
“Anne and Jane Schnieder” (without any disrespect), have repeatedly shown that they come from a ‘long generation’ of Sodomy!
Some comments here are hideous!
For full disclosure, maybe we should start identifying our “inclinations” before we post a comment….
With that, one can specifically ’situate and contextualize” such comments.
For me, not in another life can l ever be gay! NO WAY!!
May 10th, 2009 at 10:45 am
First of all, my name is Wayne, and you did mean to disrespect me. Don’t try to say otherwise.
And second, you obviously have a major, major problem with gay people. You are afraid of them. But your fear is not based on anything real, it’s all based on your ignorance of gay people. You don’t know the first thing about them.
You believe something that many homophobes wrongly believe – that gay men are both promiscuous and willing to rape anyone. Seriously, if gay men really acted the way you seem to think they do, then wouldn’t it make sense that you would be hearing something in the news every single day about one man trying to forcibly rape another? But you don’t, and do you know why? Because your assumption that all gay men are potential rapists is flat out wrong.
I hope you’re not wearing a dress made from two different cloths. (Leviticus 19:19)
BTW, not for nothing, but I do not believe the Bible is a good source for advice on how to live your life. There’s a lot they didn’t know about life, science, and truth in general. The Bible refers to menstruation as a “sickness”, and imposes harsh penalties for having contact of any kind with women who are menstruating.
Maybe the same is not true of you, but I do not need a religious text to tell me how to behave toward other people. I treat people the way I would like them to treat me. What more do I need? To be made to fear something that doesn’t exist?
May 10th, 2009 at 1:55 pm“Anne and Jane Schnieder” (without any disrespect), have repeatedly shown that they come from a ‘long generation’ of Sodomy! You need to read your Bible, Genesis 19:5-24 and see what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah….or maybe you dont even believe in God and your morals are just dictated by your lust for an arse-hole?”
Excuse me? Who’s “Anne”?
I have to say that your ‘insight’ into my comments is completely wrong. I come from a ‘long generation’ (whatever that means) of Roman Catholics, and went to Catholic schools from 1st grade through my first year in college, and NOT ONCE did any of the nuns who taught me ever mention homosexuality in any way, for evil or good. My father read the bible each and every day and was an avid church-goer, and he did not consider homosexuals to be evil or monstrous. My morals are dictated by the examples that my father and mother showed me in the tolerant, kind and truly Christian way that they led their lives. Please don’t insult their memories with your ridiculous assumptions, especially on Mothers’ Day.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:01 pmTo all those military people who showed up here to support DADT, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
I bet you didn’t even know that we wouldn’t have won the Revolutionary War if not for the vital contributions of a gay man. General Washington brought in some hired help. Baron von Steuben developed training procedures for our new Army troops, and helped instill the “good order and discipline” necessary to be a successful Army. Many of his teachings are still in use today. His contributions were appreciated so much that the baron was awarded an American citizenship after the war. Baron von Steuben was gay.
If not for a gay man, you would not be an American citizen today. Just remember that the next time you say gay people shouldn’t be allowed to serve in our military.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:18 pmWayne….
You keep forgetting, the Bible was written, re-written, revised, chopped and added to, dozens of times — oh, and this is AFTER their “perfect” translation from Hebrew and Latin….
When they didn’t see things the same, they created their own denominations…. and King James, well, he hired his own staff of writers for his version. What did the missing books say? Who was the authoritarian to say which ones make the final cut, and whats scrap paper on the ground?
So, after you can believe that a virgin gives birth to God, or 1/3 of God, cause the “Spirit was somewhere…. and then take into account, you can’t have a Perfect Man, Jesus (pronounced diff in Mexico) if we read about his first 25 yrs of life before he hung out with English-named men in the Middle East and Africa…. once you can digest all of that — w/o asking questions….. cuz, you just gotta believe…. then, you begin your quest of living a life that was forgiven of sins before you were born!
Then…. you might not wonder why laws and other things from the bible are not practiced due to being “old laws”.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:19 pm8inchcable Says:
America’s Religious Right only follows the parts of he Bible they like which, for reasons that have never been clear to me, are from the parts that covered before Jesus was born. In fact, the parts of the Bible they like the most are the least “Christian” parts of the Bible.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:32 pmThe very old saying is we are a nation of laws. Meaning we adhere to the principles of law all are equal too.
May 10th, 2009 at 4:00 pmNow having stated this I want to know why the Commander in Chief felt it necessary to not follow the law as the Commander in Chief and inform this individual Captain Sandy that she is in-violation of the Do Not Ask, Do Not Tell rule of law. Why is she not being brought up on charges under UCMJ.
I would think that Obama being a Law Professor understand what is required of him.
I will look forward to reading in the news that Obama has thought about the consequences of her actions and his actions and will as her Commander in Chief recommend her for dismissal from the military service. Should he not do this then UMMJ should mean nothing to the other soldiers which he is also Commander in Chief and they should be treated equally and fairly as the law precribes.
I do believe that when her immediate Commander finds out what has transpired he or she will take the appropriate action called for under Military Justice System.
You that are in the Military need to start writing in mass to this President asking him why he can not follow the principles to which all military members are judged.
I would like to see what President Obama has to say in his response to each of you that are straight and not Gay left leaning liberals.
Could anyone imagine this country being protected by an all GAY fudge packing hole licking ARMY. They certainly would have to change the slogan “Be All That You Can Be”!!!!!!!!!!
May 10th, 2009 at 4:06 pmI have also been reading that some here believe the Bible is not to believed. Sodomy was literally taking place in Babylon and was as heathen as it could be.
May 10th, 2009 at 4:23 pmGod in his infinite wisdom saw fit to set into motion a plan that would leave no doubt how he felt toward homosexuality. A pillar of Salt still remains of one that decided she still wanted to see Babylon.
God when he destroyed this city stated it would be desolate and nothing would every be rebuilt on it. Even to this day nothing has been built. The city was destroyed as a reminder to those that practice such calamity would in the end pay with their very souls, as did Babylon with death.
Fornicators will not see heaven, no matter how good you think you are to achieve God’s plan. Nothing unholy will have enter in to the Kingdom of Heaven.
So thinking you know God and living unprincipled lives of lust, will not meet the test of sufficiency for you to enter into a Holy City of God.
Repent while you yet live if you wish to avoid the Lake of Fire reserved for the devil and his angel followers. Those human having lost their souls through evil wickedness, will also be cast into the very same Lake of Fire. Redemption can only be found in Jesus Christ the one which bore the sins of the world upon himself. God chose that Jesus Christ his only Son would complete this task, so that men might be reconciled to the Father above. Amen.
Christian should not fellowship with homosexuals. The Bible says we are to come out from among them. We are those which have been reborn. Telling people the truth about their sins is the only way they will understand that God has chosen us that are saved to be used for this purpose. Hate us and hate God that is your choice but we are willing to bear the burden for God in Jesus Christ.
stormn00007 Says:
Why is she not being brought up on charges under UCMJ.
I suggest you read the article in the first link. (I’ve been burned by not doing that myself.) It clearly says, “Sandy’s last day in the army is May 19. She is being forced to leave the military, another service member discharged under the DADT policy.”
She’ll be out of the military is less than ten days. Happy now?
May 10th, 2009 at 4:24 pmLeoS Says:
Could anyone imagine this country being protected by an all GAY fudge packing hole licking ARMY. They certainly would have to change the slogan “Be All That You Can Be”!!!!!!!!!!
May 10th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
Do you make decisions about your family with that mind?
May 10th, 2009 at 4:25 pmstormn00007 Says:
May 10th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Do you have any evidence that any of that happened besides what’s in the Bible? ANY of it?
Because if a religious text written by mere humans is the basis of your beliefs about how the world should be run, then you should strive to be more open-minded. Oh, wait, I’m sorry. being “open-minded” is, by definition, a liberal thing.
May 10th, 2009 at 4:42 pmOk being in the military, I do not want gays in the military period. You take showers with a BUNCH of dudes, do you want one staring at you and enjoying it? Or a female for that fact even? Keep the dont ask dont tell policy it has worked so far right?
May 10th, 2009 at 5:17 pmO.K. lifer, how many times have you stood at a urinal in a public restroom?
May 10th, 2009 at 5:22 pmEveryone is entitled to their religious beliefs. No one is entitle to deny Americans their rights on the basis of those beliefs.
May 10th, 2009 at 5:23 pmUSNavyLifer Says:
Ok being in the military, I do not want gays in the military period. You take showers with a BUNCH of dudes, do you want one staring at you and enjoying it? Or a female for that fact even? Keep the dont ask dont tell policy it has worked so far right?
That is a rather vain and egotistical thing to say. Are you physically attracted to every naked woman you see? What makes you believe that every gay man is sexually attracted to every other male he sees? It is precisely because of ignorance like that that DADT should be repealed and the ban on gays serving, openly or not, in the military lifted altogether. You literally do not know what you’re talking about. Your views are ill-informed.
May 10th, 2009 at 5:56 pmyou people really burn me up with this gays in the military crap. why the hail is so important that i know you’re gay. nobody cares if gays serve in the military anymore cause theyve been doing it ever since any form of military ever existed. who gives a flip. if u can shoot a gun thats all this country needs. so keep ur sex life to yourself. the problem is you dont want rights because you already have those. YOU WANT ATTENTION and a more gay america. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!
May 10th, 2009 at 6:19 pmWhy did this woman open her mouth about it in the first place?? Was she being a trouble maker or trying to get discharged? I mean, how did it come up? Did she just mention it in casual conversation or did they catch her licking cootch? If she made it a point to tell them she was a lesbo then she got what she deserved by breaking the law. Law breakers are supposed to be punished. Not commended, patted on the back and promised that the laws will be changed to suit them. I mean, if that’s the case then next time I get a speeding ticket I’ll just write to the president and he’ll have to change the law and clear my ticket. And who is he to say he’ll change the laws? He is supposed to do what WE tell him to do. Not what HE wants to do. Isn’t he supposed to be working for America as a whole and not one specific minority? He’d better have more important things to worry about than some idiot who made her bed and was forced to lie in it. If he doesn’t, we’re all in trouble.
May 10th, 2009 at 6:22 pmAnd no Wayne Ant Schneider. Your views are the ones ill formed and thought out. You say that most people are not attracted to every naked male or female they see. But if you knew there was a gay man or a lesbian in the shower with you, it would make you feel uncomfortable. Most places will fire you if you discuss your amount of pay and this should be no different. Its no one elses business so keep it to yourself! Geez, its not rocket science! I’ve worked with several gay people and when someone comes in, after they leave again the covnersation is “Oh, I would totally do her!” or “Eeewww, there’s no way!” Just because gay people may not be attracted to everyone they see doesn’t mean they aren’t looking at you and thinking about it. Only problem is, men can’t come into the womens showers and vice versa. Gay’s and lesbians are right there with you the entire time.
May 10th, 2009 at 6:35 pmWe can’t expect soldiers to tolerate discomfort. That is a hoot.
May 10th, 2009 at 6:40 pmWiley, thanks for being a strong voice of reason on this board. You are continuing to serve this country well by your cogent method of speaking up and countering a lot of ridiculous naysayers.
My belief is that the military must be made through law to embrace all forms of equality. In one or two generations, gays and lesbians will be able to serve openly with far less fear of getting the living crap kicked out of them by those they serve with. There is a long history in our country of laws lagging behind current thinking. When it comes to equality, the right thing to do is allow all good soldiers to serve.
Wiley, perhaps we should go get a glass of something fermented while the bigots continue to post their nastiness.
Lauren the over educated happy dyke, looking forward to the loutish slurs soon to follow…
May 10th, 2009 at 7:05 pmWayne Ant Schneider Says:
——————————————————————————–
stormn00007 Says:
Why is she not being brought up on charges under UCMJ.
I suggest you read the article in the first link. (I’ve been burned by not doing that myself.) It clearly says, “Sandy’s last day in the army is May 19. She is being forced to leave the military, another service member discharged under the DADT policy.”
She’ll be out of the military is less than ten days. Happy now?
I’m quite happy that we will no longer have an Officer which feels it necessary to write the CIC in hopes of saving her career. I wonder how many other women, she placed in compromising position because of her Gayness.
So my answer is emphatically, YES!
May 10th, 2009 at 7:10 pmYou people don’t get it. She failed to follow orders that she swore an oath to follow. She just didn’t like it so she wrote the pres. So what orders does she follow? Only the ones she likes and when she likes them? Real good example of what the Dems have done the flush this country down the toilet. I think we should also allow drug usage too. After all what you do on your time is your business.
May 10th, 2009 at 7:30 pmI don’t know what this means but this is the first time I’ve ever found a direct link from YAHOO to ThinkProgress.
I was looking at the headlines in Yahoo and this story was at the top of “Most Blogged Stories” with a direct link to this story and TP.
May 10th, 2009 at 7:40 pmfemales say that they do not want to shower with men because the men will be checking them out or see them naked! why can’t hetrosexuals feel the same way about gay people? not bashing just wanting a rational (non gay supporting or bashing) answer?
May 10th, 2009 at 7:43 pmI would suggest that all retired military write to this Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA), stating their objection to the rule change and how it will effect military morale and cohessiveness.
May 10th, 2009 at 7:45 pmThis girl is just being an attention whore. If she hadn’t been very open about her sexuality, nothing would have happened. I mean, most heterosexuals don’t go around letting everyone know that they are heterosexual. They just go about their business. If she had done the same, there would be no problem.
May 10th, 2009 at 7:54 pmseslichat
May 10th, 2009 at 8:14 pmsesli sohbet
sesli chat
seslisohbet
Perfect example of what I’m talking about, Lauren. She signs off by saying “Lauren the over educated happy dyke”. Why do you feel the need to include a statement about your sexuality? I don’t sign off with “Jim the Masters-Degree-toting heterosexual-sex-having guy.” Just keep your sexuality to yourself. That is why is it called part of your “private life”. People would not care nearly as much if you are gay or straight if you wouldn’t be up in everybody’s face about it.
May 10th, 2009 at 8:14 pmAbsolutely…let them put on their pink camo and get on the front line IN FRONT of the good american soldiers, protecting them from the incoming fire.
its fitting since the american people are going to be “taking it up the rear” in higher insurance premiums when these dumbass states start giving them the same benifits as real people who are married.
She knew the rules when she joined the military….throw her out!! Good riddance.
May 10th, 2009 at 8:43 pmAbcdef, straight people make damn sure everyone in the room knows they’re straight. You just don’t like gays and lesbians, am I correct?
May 10th, 2009 at 9:17 pmwhy is it being gay is ok and being straight is wrong in the eyes of gay people?
May 10th, 2009 at 9:27 pmI never knew a gay person that thought being straight was wrong. They didn’t shun me for being straight. Most gays I’ve known say “a tiger can’t change his stripes”, or something to that effect, and don’t blame straight people for being straight any more than they blame themselves for being gay.
May 10th, 2009 at 9:36 pmblack people did not choose what color they were born the are a race of people and therefore deserve equal rights. choosing to be gay is not a race it is an alternative life style. pervs that like children are now saying they live an alternative lifestyle’ once we start giving alternative lifestyles rights we have include the all in order for the rights to be equal. why would gays care they they aren’t going to have kids anyway
May 10th, 2009 at 9:41 pmlouie123 Says:
——————————————————————————–
black people did not choose what color they were born the are a race of people and therefore deserve equal rights. choosing to be gay is not a race it is an alternative life style. pervs that like children are now saying they live an alternative lifestyle’ once we start giving alternative lifestyles rights we have include the all in order for the rights to be equal. why would gays care they they aren’t going to have kids anyway
stormn00007 says
May 10th, 2009 at 10:54 pmVery well stated and I’m sure most Americans that are from the heartland of America and shore to shore are fed up, with homosexuals believing they have a right to push their agenda, down the throat of all of us that are straight. We the straight community are the ones providing children to continue society with morales and integrity. Truth will set you free, so I would believe that this homosexual crowd needs to pack their bags and allow the rest of us to forget them in America sexual reality.
Funny how often “pushing down the throat” comes up with you homophobes.
May 10th, 2009 at 11:04 pmThe policy in place should be replaced with a policy of “Don’t Care!” A pass or sexual advance at a fellow service member should be accepted or rebuffed, as chosen by the recipient, with appropriate restraint on the part of both parties without respect to gender. The biggest fear most straights have is unwelcome ogling or leering in communal environments (showers, latrines & barracks). A simple tactful rebuff is all that is required under current sexual harrassment statutes to establish the limit of tolerance. Up to that limit the official policy should be “Don’t Care!” for consensual and private conduct between consenting servicemembers and their military or non-military partners of choice.
and
May 10th, 2009 at 11:19 pmGOPretvet Says:
Well put, I agree.
May 10th, 2009 at 11:33 pmseslichat
May 10th, 2009 at 11:44 pmsesli chat
sesli sohbet
seslisohbet
wiley Says:
——————————————————————————–
Funny how often “pushing down the throat” comes up with you homophobes.
Only someone Gay would associate pushing things down ones throat as being a sexual aberration.
May 11th, 2009 at 12:00 amGOPretvet Says:
——————————————————————————–
The policy in place should be replaced with a policy of “Don’t Care!” A pass or sexual advance at a fellow service member should be accepted or rebuffed, as chosen by the recipient, with appropriate restraint on the part of both parties without respect to gender. The biggest fear most straights have is unwelcome ogling or leering in communal environments (showers, latrines & barracks). A simple tactful rebuff is all that is required under current sexual harassment statutes to establish the limit of tolerance. Up to that limit the official policy should be “Don’t Care!” for consensual and private conduct between consenting service members and their military or non-military partners of choice.
and
Stated like a desirous homosexual wanting the offended party to respond to the need of pompous ass-ed homosexual. Pass!
May 11th, 2009 at 12:02 amI’m not gay. I’m a straight woman. I take it, you’ve never given a blow job, stormn.
May 11th, 2009 at 12:19 amIt is ridiculous that in 2009 we are still dealing (and not very well) with this issue. I am a 52 year old Navy veteran who enlisted during the last gasps of the Vietnam war. One of my co-workers, a Hospital Corpsman who had served honorably in that war, was being kicked out with a bad conduct discharge simply because he had been reported by a snitch as being gay. It was wrong then, and it is wrong now. To have decorated, certified heros barred from serving their country, or even worse, have their honors stripped from them over who they happen to love, is a shame on this country.
My son, prior to announcing his sexuality, wanted to serve in the Navy also, but gave that up because he refused to be a hypocrite and hide who he was. DADT was a bone that Clinton threw to the neocons to try to ‘get along’. President Obama has a loaded House and a filibuster proof Senate. It is time for him to get off his duff and push through legislation giving equal rights to ALL Americans, not just the ones approved by Limbaugh and Company.
May 11th, 2009 at 12:50 amDunh! It does not take an I.Q. over 70 to figure out why DADT and even more Progressive political ideologies relating to basic facts of life are so far in left field that they aren’t even in the fame league, let alone ballpark for fundamentally sound reasons.
Ponder for a moment why, throughout modern history, that the “American Soldier” to whom we owe our LIBERTY and other freedoms outlined in The Constitution has always defeated all enemy soldiers at a ratio of 10:1. They never asked what the country could do for them, rather how they could defend and ensure the basic values upon which this nation was formed and has been defended and protected. Progressive ideologies are doomed, based upon their premises demanding change. The President and his progressive minions who want, want, want and who are unwilling to pay the price of recognizing how it is that this wonderful nation will prevail in the long run. Simply call it the “Invisible Hand” of political history that is sure to continue with it’s magic, until Progressives can rationalize their actions before their behaviors are controlled enough that their political and social attitudes will eventually come around and more closely match their behavior. To make it easier for some of you to understand, think about what happens to the political ideologies of assembly line workers who are promoted to Foreman status. You will then either change your own attitudes and belief systems or wind up excluded from what you had, at one time, thought desirable.
May 11th, 2009 at 1:53 amEventually, you lose one thing or another. In any case, there will be “anomie” in your future unless you fade away into one form of subculture or another. It’s called isolation and eventually it WILL wear you down, until you “get it.”
As far as I am concerned, you can have Obama’s “s’s” at either the beginning or end of his vacuous clap trap, Ivy League “wanna be” life style and fundamental lie. He is marginalizing himself more and more each day. Eventually, most any untruth and weakness unveils itself with the tests of time and contexts. He and folks of his “ilk” just don’t fit — kinda like O.J.’s glove, if you are old enough to appreciate that reference.
I can recall the feeling I had while I was in Washington, D.C., during the trial. Look at what happened to O.J.. Imagine what a Chicago Block worker’s come down will look like. Let’s hope he can handle it like a man and continue to do his best in many areas that his efforts are truly positive contributions to the greater good. He’s darned bright, but thinking about the price he has committed himself to, and the American Public scares the heck out of me. He could have been an exceptional leader, had he had the patience and long-term perspective to earn it. As some of you may already know, I just fitted myself for cement overshoes. Irrespective of my personal fate, I know that the American Spirit will continue to prevail, just as Prime Minister Brown said in his address to Congress. I hope you can bring yourself to consider a dissenting opinion. That is one good measure of maturity and commitment to laudable long-term goals that earn the respect they deserve, rather than demanding it as an Entitlement.
Please ponder the use of the words “respect” and “entitlement” in the same sentence. That just might help you wrestle with some of the concepts I am striving to convey. It takes great courage to be a good listener. I haven’t come to my conclusion concerning Mr. Obama’s patience and ability to live up to that promise.
I was in the military. What you folks seem to forget is the Military is not some social experiment but a killing machine charged with the defense of the country. It is full of young, conservative men and women who do not share your values. You talk about ordering the military to accept homosexuals, easier said then done. There are lots of “training accidents” during live fire exercises that could happen. None of these guys want to worry about some homosexual hitting on them in the shower. I personally knew a private get the hell kicked out of him by his unit when he hit on someone. When they came around investigating the incident there were no “witnesses” Homosexuals have always been in the military and have served quietly. The military will not tolerate anything less.
May 11th, 2009 at 2:17 amYou homophobes obviously aren’t reading posts you don’t agree with. I’m a veteran, and a woman. Paloecon, TowardaMorePerfectUnion, and Wayne are veterans or serving.
There were plenty of liberals in the military when I was in. Get off this high-horse about only you understanding the military.
The military will in all likelihood do what it’s told or suffer the consequences if discipline is enforced. The military has integrated blacks and women. There have been problems, there still are. These problems exist in civilian society as well.
There are problems beyond race, gender, and sexuality in the military. Slack-jawed morons with behavioral problems who can’t read and are barely functional as civilians appears to be quite a problem.
May 11th, 2009 at 3:18 amMy question is this…why do homosexuals or those who support homosexuals refer to straight people who are anti same sex as homophobs? a phobia means I am scared of it. I am not scared of homosexuals…I have in my life known many homosexuals, that doesn’t mean I have to accept it, agree with it, or like it….but I sure as hell not scared of it.
moderate2009-you hit it right on…I agree!
People also remember as a member of the U.S. Armed Forces I am not entitled to the same rights and privleges as the average American….I give up alot of my rights when I enlist.
May 11th, 2009 at 3:38 amAllowing homosexuals in the military is against good order and unit cohesion, no matter what you say it breaks down a units “brotherhood/sisterhood”!!! That is it. Lets say, for example 20% of the Army was gay, and 10% of the non gay accepted it, that still leaves 70% who object and it would affect the way they functioned. You cannot tell an Army unit Suck it up and drive on(An Army term not an anti gay jab. In the Army it is what is best for the Army and unit, not the individual Soldier.
Oh and since everyone else is flaughnting their sexuality, I AM A MALE LESBIAN!!!!!! Straight male if you did not get it!!!! Hooahhh! Have a great Army day!
So our obama guy you all call president (we know he’s just a no birth-cert havin liar) is at it again…GITMO, AIG, GM Afganistan, Open homosexuality in military, WOW- we are going to be attacked! The play book is open and easier to read than ever. So many issues with this topic. The girl broke the law and ought to be treated like the criminal she is. Y do we have all this mess? God’s law has been replaced with special minority rights and the opposite of the teachings of the oldest historical reference we have, the BIBLE (also known as the handbook to happiness/ fulfillment/ having a good life, etc). So many atheists (evolutionists I am sure) on this thread. Can’t prove there’s a God? Just say there isn’t one and you’re home free- no moral responsibility, and NO consequences whatsoever if you act within the law! Another topic dominated with foolishness but I actually can prove devolution, the mutual excluder of evo. Anyone care to be enlightened? Oh wait-forgot it’s a lefty thread! Barac a Christian? That’s a joke. Really puts things in perspective to hear a few of you worshipping the Anti-Christ you call Prez. I believe history says gays are best off not being gay while serving long periods with straights.
May 11th, 2009 at 3:55 amOh yeah- someone said we’re not here to judge- only God judges or something- I recently learned we HAVE to make judgements everyday- so judge, but don’t condemn.
May 11th, 2009 at 4:01 amThat is why as Christian Americans it is our duty, not to just sit on chat sites and talk about this…but to get out and vote for politicians with our values, goals, and lifestyles. To teach our children to be friendly, responsible citizens, but to also know right from wrong!! Until then the evil minority will always win. We are losing our freedoms bc we won’t get off our asses and vote. We won’t get up and fight for our rights! Why should I care about your rights when you are trampling on mine!!!
May 11th, 2009 at 4:09 amHell I wish now Hillary would have won, at least she wasn’t stupid enough to buy off on this crap.
Hopefully Obama will piss enough Americans off we can impeach him.
You are losing your freedoms when you aren’t allowed to deny other people their freedoms? Interesting.
May 11th, 2009 at 4:46 am8Inch Cable said:
So, after you can believe that a virgin gives birth to God, or 1/3 of God, cause the “Spirit was somewhere…. and then take into account, you can’t have a Perfect Man, Jesus (pronounced diff in Mexico) if we read about his first 25 yrs of life before he hung out with English-named men in the Middle East and Africa…. once you can digest all of that — w/o asking questions….. cuz, you just gotta believe…. then, you begin your quest of living a life that was forgiven of sins before you were born!
MY REPLY- You mock my God and Religion….but wish me to accept the rights of homosexuals!!!!????? You truley are an ASS CLOWN!!!!!! In every posting I made on here I have strived not to name call or attempt to degrade, just to show my point of view…but you are just plain stupid. You are probably one of those dumB@ss’ who tried to close the USMC Recruiting Station in Berkley.
May 11th, 2009 at 5:05 amWiley, we can’t confuse what ought to be with reality as it is. Right now there is a lot of hostility toward homosexuals, as evidenced by some of the posts. Maybe a hundred years from now our decedents will wonder what all the fuss was about, but in the meantime change takes time. It took a hundred years to racially integrate the armed forces, and it began with separate units. I don’t know if that is the answer here or not, but thinking that something as explosive as this can be resolved merely with the stroke of a pen is naive.
May 11th, 2009 at 6:51 amI agree,gays should be allowed in the military,we need all the cannon fodder we can get.Just because the lord on high OBAMA said he was going to do it,means nothing,check out all of his lies with google.
May 11th, 2009 at 8:06 amGsy men are, in effect, women in drag. I do not want to share the barrack shower with such an abberation.
May 11th, 2009 at 8:24 amWhy should the president of the United Staes spend two seconds on this PERSONAL matter??? I mean, really, I don’t give a rat’s butt where a military man sits or puts in his or her mouth. If it has nothing to do with serving the country, I DON’T CARE, and I am a black, conservative, right wing Christian fundamentalist wacko wayyyyy to the right of Rush Limbaugh! I see gays as trying to advance their “acceptance” cause by advertising “we are everywhere”. There would not be as much of problem with gays in the military if the gays would just keep it to themselves. I served for 23 years and never felt it necessary to march in and inform my commander “hey, I’M STRAIGHT”. What is the purpose? You have klansmen, Islamic jihadists, anti-government militias, Black Panthers, anarchists and all sorts of people serving in the military. How many do you hear about dancing around singing “I’m gay, I’m gay”? Serving is not a RIGHT. I say, let EVERYONE serve who wants to, but don’t change any rules to accommodate anyone except when it comes to sleeping/shower arrangements. Sexual differences (male/female, gay/straight) should not share bunking or bathing arrangements is the only restriction I would place on anyone. If there are any straight people on this blog, think of this: Just you and a gay person are seen coming out of the shower within minutes of each other. Of course, this means nothing to the gay person, and maybe not to the straight person, but you are seen by gays AND straights. What stops either or both groups from thinking, or at least wondering if BOTH of you are gay (or straight).
May 11th, 2009 at 8:33 amWe are a 20+ year military family. I can honestly say that in those years, I have yet to come across a circumstance where it was necessary for a soldier to proclaim their sexual preference. Soldiers are adults who, last I knew, were supposed to be capable of knowing how to avoid a compromising situation. Just as men & women who are straight do not go into the opposite sex’s changing room (out of respect), I’m sure gays are as capable of making the same decision to do what’s right. No one needs to give a speech or proclamation as to why they won’t be changing in the locker room. Heterosexual couples do not stand up in the office and announce that when they go home that night, they are going to make love to their spouse. No one cares. I think at this point in our society, we can tell when someone is probably homosexual. Don’t need to hit us over the head with a bullhorn. I, for one, don’t make it my business to comment on your personal life (gay or straight), but choose – instead – to respect you for who you are and what you accomplish with your life – and if you are a compassionate, hard working human being.
May 11th, 2009 at 9:05 amPersonal lives are personal. As long as there is no unbecoming behavior of a U.S. soldier gay or otherwise (general law breaking), why should anyone care what someone’s sexual preference is? You serve your country, serve it honorably, and live your life.
If you’re happy – great. If you’re living a healthy, productive life – great.I don’t care that you’re gay until you use it to make a political statement while on the clock. Work, go home, live your life.
I was in the military for four years, and as a woman I can say without reservation, that men expressed their heterosexuality all the time. Just by listening to conversations I could tell you who were the breast men, who were the leg men, what hair color of hair they preferred, whether or not they would “do” women of different hues, whether or not they got laid last night, where they were going to get laid that night, and on and on and on and on….You people telling you’re military, and then telling me that military men are the paragons of gentlemanly discretion are either in denial, or FULL OF S*IT.
May 11th, 2009 at 9:25 amThe problem with this is what are the rights for the non gays in the military? Personally I do not wish to share a shower with other females that are gay. If we allowed this then why not let there be no gender separation for every aspect as in sleeping/showers ect. or will we have to set up special times for non gays and gays to shower so we do not run into this problem. Sharing a shower with other gay females is in essence the same as sharing a shower with males. How will those that are not gay be protected from those that are for those more private moments?
May 11th, 2009 at 9:26 amFirst off, my thoughts and ideals are slanted by my beliefs, which I will not share here. But I am also not nearly as arrogant as some of the people on here. As a practising heterosexual (although I don’t practice nearly as often as I’d like) I don’t think women stare at me all the time. Trust me, I ain’t all that. Do SOME women find me moderately attractive? Possibly. Do some MEN find me attractive. Having been hit on by a homosexual male, I have to say yes. Now, when a woman hit on me, if I thought she was my type I flirted. If not, I simply said thank you but you’re not my type. I am thinking this would work with guys as well, since I told the homosexual male that I was not gay. Homosexuality is a choice, and I choose not to partake of it. A simple “No” seems to work. Why do straight guys think gay guys will molest them? There are MILLIONS of homosexuals in the workplace and I have never been assaulted by one. Millions of women too, but nope, no assaults. Get over yourselves.
May 11th, 2009 at 10:16 amWiley, as for men talking to your tits, well that’s par for the course. I ain’t got ‘em so I stare. I try not to, and it is a struggle for MOST straight men, but forgive me for staring. Take it as a compliment. They are nice enough to grab my attention. If we ever meet, feel free to pay me back… my crotch is yours for the gawking.
As for DADT, I thought it was somethng that worked. Had this officer not brought it up she would still be in the military. It is HER fault. Watch… when the DADT policy is overturned, she will be on the platform with the prez, who will promptly reinstate her. I don’t push my agenda to get better working conditions for my people. I knew the job and agreed to the work. I shut up and do my job. Maybe if gays and lesbians did the same, heterosexuals would have respect for them. Instead, they do as little as possible and when they don’t get what they want cry discrimination. They are too busy marching for “equal rights.” But don’t get me started on that.
OK, I’m confused, I thought this woman was an officer in the military? Did she or did she not agree to comply with the rules of the military when she joined? Did she know she was gay before she joined? If so why in heaven’s name did she join an organization where her sexuality would be an issue? If she wanted to serve her country, there is no rule that says the ONLY way to do that is in the military. She could have CHOSEN to be a civilian contractor, then her sexuality would not matter. Lots of jobs have rules about what can be discussed in their place of employment, I know about companies that will fire you if you disclose your salary to other employees. This is the same thing. This is NOT about who she sleeps with, this is about HER failure to comply with orders about discussing her private life at work. The policy is DON’T ASK DON’T TELL, not beat me over the head with your sexuality.
This is not a religious issue, this is not a prejudice issue, this is an issue of a member of our armed forces who refused to comply with an order. It is not like she is the only person who has been forced out of the military because she said something to a superior that she was not supposed to.
Service members who, for whatever reason, want to discontinue their service to this country will often purposely disclose this to a superior in an attempt to get out of their contract. It is no different than a service member being forced out of the military because of racist views or anti-American views. The difference is . . . they are NOT spared the consequences of the UCMJ as this woman seems to be.
This was a PURELY political move on BOTH parts. Obama is pandering to the Gay extremists and she is doing here best to ensure that there will be NO consequences for violating a law. There is NO WAY the military will pursue her now for fear of public backlash. If you think for a moment that this was something other than political you are truly niave! Obama could care less about a single soldier, he sees this as a political goldmine to further his policies. Period!
I know that some of you will disagree with me, and you know what, my husband goes to work everyday, he deploys to foreign countries, leaving our children behind for months at a time, so that YOU have the freedom to think and say whatever you want! It will not bother me one bit if you disagree with me.
But just remember freedom is not free, it is a gift paid for with the blood of our service members who sacrifice every day for all of you!
May 11th, 2009 at 10:20 amAgain reading patches of comments, but I seem to notice a trend- a lot of people are talking about how it’s ‘Christian’ to ban the gays from the military.
I’m sorry, what? Last I checked, Christianity was falling by the wayside, and some of us feel that ‘because God said so’ is not a valid excuse. After all, the percentage of Christians in America has dropped by around 10% over the last 5 years. And not even the Christians can agree if homosexuality is bad! Besides, didn’t we come to America to get away from religious oppression in the first place? Someone needs to take a step away from their bible and pick up a history book now and then.
Besides, DADT would only apply if they don’t ask. Since they do ask, the government is failing to uphold their half of the bargain. So this whole conversation is null.
May 11th, 2009 at 10:26 am“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because (AL)that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became (AO)futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be ishonored among them.
For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, (AY)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice…” Romans 1:18-29, The Bible (NASB)
May 11th, 2009 at 10:30 amIt is a mistake to change the DADT ,period! I am a combat veteran, Your sexual orientation has no bearing on your job, do what you want on your time, but the military has standards and traditions to uphold. Dont let the 20% or so gay community to dictate our heritage. Unless you have fought for your country, keep your oppinions to yourself!
May 11th, 2009 at 10:33 amNightly, I question whether some of you scared-of-the-gay are military—I have a hard time believing you are a woman, or a woman in the military. If you are a woman in the military, you WILL discover that you are vulnerable anywhere on a military base, fully clothed.
May 11th, 2009 at 10:33 amSee, this is exactly my point. Christianity is one of the only religions that claims everyone else is WRONG. Which is funny, because, most of Christianity was formed of all those Pagan religions that you hate so much. You know, Christmas? Midwinter, celebrates the longest day of the year and new years all in one. Or, Easter? Celebrates the coming of spring and fertility.
Christianity: The belief that some cosmic Jewish Zombie can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force form your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
May 11th, 2009 at 10:36 amOH GOOD GOD! Are you people in the military, or in a state of denial, or BOTH.
Military bases are famous for being surrounded by prostitution, strip clubs, and rape. This squeaky clean morality you’re claiming for the military is horse-sh^t!
Military bases are also big customers and sometimes distribution points for sex trafficking
link
link
The military is also allowing criminals and gang members into their ranks. If you want to complain about that lapse in morality and “cohesion” then let us know.
May 11th, 2009 at 10:41 amHalf of you visitors claiming to be military sound a lot like stateside wives living in a dreamworld.
May 11th, 2009 at 10:42 amSo when did a non-serving(military),never hold a real job, lying,possible non-American,mute broken armed(pledge of allegience)vindictive,bleeding heart liberal get a say in what goes on in an organization he never served in or for. This Country is going to hell in a handbasket because of morons putting idiots in office like the above mentioned and the Clintons,Pelosi’s,etc. You want to be gay be gay but shut the hell up about it. You want to be straight be straight. It will all be dealt with in the end by someone who knows the real rules, hey believe it or don’t believe it, Good Luck in the end. Have a nice Day
May 11th, 2009 at 10:53 amYo Wiley, no one is claiming hetero men as paragons of morality. What you witnessed is bragging and sex talk which is common on across gender lines. The complaint here is in bragging about sexual orientation or just announcing, for example, I am Gay as if it were a badge of honor. Hetero men and women do not go about proudly professing their orientation because who gives a rip. If someone is gay the rest of us simply do not want to hear them make a big deal out of it. Go be gay and shut up. I suppose a couple gay military men can discuss the other troops’ endowments, but they need to be discreet about it now don’t they.
May 11th, 2009 at 11:01 amcecil, they don’t have to say “I am straight” when half their talk is about fu*kin women. And don’t tell me you think it’s o.k. for two gay men in the military to engage in such “bragging” and “sex talk”.
May 11th, 2009 at 11:10 amWiley>> No wonder illusionists get elected… you can now surmise that hospitals are the cause of illness and doctors promote disease for profit. Hey genius: law-enforcement are stationed in lawless areas for a reason. Principles of Right-Wrong are not established by statistical data but by TRUTH. And I anticipate your next thought to be WHAT IS TRUTH? … I rest my case!
May 11th, 2009 at 11:17 amWhat the hell are you nattering on about?
May 11th, 2009 at 11:23 amopenyoreyesnotmouth Says:
That would probably be when he was elected as President of the United States, and according to the Constitution, Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. This would be the same office held by the following:
John Adams
John Quincy Adams
Martin Van Buren
Grover Cleveland
William Howard Taft
Woodrow Wilson
Warren G. Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Bill Clinton
If not for 3 weeks in the Illinois Militia in 1832, Abraham Lincoln would join this list of Presidents who have been in charge of the military without ever serving in its ranks. Considering he was ‘elected’ Captain of pretty much a ragtag group hastily assembled, never saw any action, then was disbanded, he might as well be on that list. I’ve seen kids sent longer to summer camp under worse conditions.
I am not a fan of non veterans being in charge of the military, however it happens, and the Constitution is very clear on its requirements for the office of President, military service is not among them.
As far as me being a liberal, I am not. I am a Paleo Conservative, as opposed to a neo-conservative. We believe in equal rights and responsibilities for ALL Americans, not just the ‘flavor of the month’. We also believe that it is not our job to be the world’s policeman.
The arguements about maintaining ‘good order’ in the military is nothing but a smokescreen, the same arguement that was made by bigots attempting to keep blacks from military service, then once that was a fait accompli, to keep them out of previously segregated units. Neither arguement held water then, and they don’t now. There will always be bigots in the military, they have the right to hate anyone they like, as long as they keep their hatred to themselves and do not act on it. When and if they act on it, prosecute them to the fullest extent of military law. The vast majority of servicepeople are mature and honorable enough that they would just take note of the changes and go about their jobs like they always do with policy changes.
May 11th, 2009 at 12:03 pmHere’s a new policy for our military, “Don’t care, doesn’t matter, get back to work.”
May 11th, 2009 at 1:22 pmjlb478 Says:
——————————————————————————–
Here’s a new policy for our military, “Don’t care, doesn’t matter, get back to work.”
Truth of the matter it does matter. You obviously live in another reality. Were it not so the discussion here would not exist. Just people like you that wish to hide their head in the sand like an ostrich and pretend all is well with the world, as it is in your world.
May 11th, 2009 at 4:06 pmMaybe not taking so much crack cocaine would clear your head for a better view of what is really going on in the real world and not in your head.
Paleocon Says:
——————————————————————————–
openyoreyesnotmouth Says:
So when did a non-serving(military),never hold a real job, lying,possible non-American,mute broken armed(pledge of allegience)vindictive,bleeding heart liberal get a say in what goes on in an organization he never served in or for.
That would probably be when he was elected as President of the United States, and according to the Constitution, Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. This would be the same office held by the following:
John Adams
John Quincy Adams
Martin Van Buren
Grover Cleveland
William Howard Taft
Woodrow Wilson
Warren G. Harding
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Bill Clinton
If not for 3 weeks in the Illinois Militia in 1832, Abraham Lincoln would join this list of Presidents who have been in charge of the military without ever serving in its ranks. Considering he was ‘elected’ Captain of pretty much a ragtag group hastily assembled, never saw any action, then was disbanded, he might as well be on that list. I’ve seen kids sent longer to summer camp under worse conditions.
I am not a fan of non veterans being in charge of the military, however it happens, and the Constitution is very clear on its requirements for the office of President, military service is not among them.
As far as me being a liberal, I am not. I am a Paleo Conservative, as opposed to a neo-conservative. We believe in equal rights and responsibilities for ALL Americans, not just the ‘flavor of the month’. We also believe that it is not our job to be the world’s policeman.
The arguements about maintaining ‘good order’ in the military is nothing but a smokescreen, the same arguement that was made by bigots attempting to keep blacks from military service, then once that was a fait accompli, to keep them out of previously segregated units. Neither arguement held water then, and they don’t now. There will always be bigots in the military, they have the right to hate anyone they like, as long as they keep their hatred to themselves and do not act on it. When and if they act on it, prosecute them to the fullest extent of military law. The vast majority of servicepeople are mature and honorable enough that they would just take note of the changes and go about their jobs like they always do with policy changes.
Lot of spillage coming from your post in regards to you. It is not about you or what you think.
May 11th, 2009 at 4:23 pmYour thoughts as to what the military would do about getting on with business does not sit well with the military and never has.
The truth is that blacks in the military should never have been an issue to begin with. The same as any other red blooded American wishing to serve his Country. Gay’s are pink blooded and from counter to the Alpha male in combat. Notice I stated combat which means aggression is required. The willingness to kill your enemy not blow them.
Since women now do serve in combat when required to defend themselves and their units I would hope they would find the Alpha gene to accomplish the mission. There can be no nurturing of either males or females because that will get you killed.
Homosexual make great decorators and girlfriends to females when they are male by birth but decide to wear Mom’s shoes and dresses. Now the truth is combat boots are not an apparel that most Gay’s dream of am I not correct, Gay community?
navywife – well said.
Wiley – if you’d like for navywife and I to rattle off a string of acronyms that rule our existences as military spouses on a daily basis, I’m sure we’d be glad to.
You can’t “fake” that you’re military or military family member without screwing up the lingo. I can spot a fake a mile away, and so far I haven’t seen any here.
I think Americans are simply FED up with the “I’m gay! I’m gay” battle cry. Just go on about your life, and live it fully, peacefully, and productively. NO one cares about your gay or straight preferences.
We don’t care if you have an attraction to the same sex, or to goldfish, for that matter. DON’T CARE. Just do your job, stick to the business at hand, and do not turn your career into a political statement or convenient soap box.
Our men and women in uniform do not protect American Citizens and American interests based on a person’s sexual preference.
And believe it or not, terrorists will kill you whether you’re gay or straight. A soldier’s goal is to prevent that from happening. Thank them, and stop your whining.
May 11th, 2009 at 4:35 pmWho is whining? Who is coming to this board saying, “no gays, no gays, oh mommy, I can’t stand it, I’ll leave”…
I don’t think you’re being very honest here. By just making someone aware that they’re gay, gay service members can be dishonorably discharged, they don’t have to make a big deal of it to suffer punitive consequences.
I served in nuclear forces. I’m quite aware that there are dangers facing all human beings on the planet. I am quite convinced that we don’t need knuckle-dragging homophobes to defend us also.
I’m also straight, and I will continue to make a big deal out of the service kicking out perfectly good soldiers for being gay, while admitting criminals, gang bangers, skin-heads, white supremacists, rapists, etc….
If people advocating for a group of people that is being discriminated against is incovenient for you then that’s your problem.
These are results from a poll of soldiers who might have to actually take group showers after boot camp, and share bunks.
link
Perhaps, facing real danger puts things into perspective, huh? Most of the soldiers saying they’ll leave if gays are allowed to serve openly are full of shit. The same threats were made before desegregation. Before women were integrated into the military, 25% of West Point graduates said they would quit. Not even close.
Fortunately, for everyone’s safety, once a decision is made at the top and enforced, good soldiers fall in.
May 11th, 2009 at 4:59 pmjlb478 Says:
Here’s a new policy for our military, “Don’t care, doesn’t matter, get back to work.”
———————
Here, here!
I once heard a gay man say that you’re either with the Phelps clan, or against them. (www.phagsforphelps.com)
Since the Phleps’ also think that the war right now is a good thing, and ‘thank God for dead soldiers’ and all that crap, I would hope you’re all against them.
If not, well, you’re a discriminating bastard, and there’s a special place in the underworld just for you.
May 11th, 2009 at 8:02 pmWhat do you not understand about those in the military that are required to follow orders? The order is do not ask, do not tell. It is and order and when you refuse that order you get canned.
May 11th, 2009 at 9:17 pmYou want to protest for Gay’s get the hell of out the military and go to your Gay Protest Parade wearomg tinker bells plus tutu. Those that are in the military wear the uniform proudly not for the purpose of protesting but for the purpose of defending the United States.
We can only assume Captain Sandy Taso wanted and audience with her CIC. I would think that this Captain has the brain that allowed her to become a Captain. Her reasoning for writing the CIC was to believe she could force him to kill the policy.
CIC Obama had better be very careful when dealing with an all volunteer force. He might succeed under a draft in making such and immediate change but these young people joined for God and Country, will not tolerate another Clinton moment.
My son was serving in the Air Force while Clinton was President and he decided he would not serve with Fags. Those that have a faith in God will not disobey their beliefs for some Moron that can change policy with a stroke of a pen.
Bring on the Gay brigade with their tinkling bells and see what you have for a military force. I do not believe many Alpha Males will take order from the Gay Leader when he or she know what they are.
The blathering about this Captains decision to make herself known worked and it only goes to show the military wants no part of a change unless it is a ban on Gay’s serving.
If you don’t believe there are gay alpha males, I would like to see you walk into a San Francisco gay biker bar and yell out the following sentence:
“Any of you faggots here think you’re tough?”
Then when and if you get out of the hospital, come back on here and tell us what happened…
There are all sorts of gays just like there are all sorts of straights. The alphas are the ones who would normally be attracted to a military career.
As far as blacks in the military being a non issue, you aren’t old enough to have experienced the uproar that caused. I am not either, but I heard the stories from my father who served in WWII and Korea. The same bigoted propaganda faced blacks prior to Truman integrating the army. Prior to that time, with some notable exceptions such as the Tuskegee Airmen, blacks were segregated into non combat positions, ie: cooks, truck drivers, and freight support. They were considered cowardly and untrustworthy to be in combat operations. They were also denied the medals and citations for bravery that they earned. Until Clinton administration officials combed the records, there were no Medal of Honor winners in WWII who were black.
Gays serve openly in other countries militaries such as the Israeli Defence Force, not exactly a wimpy organisation. With our policies, we are rejecting a pool of talent that we can ill afford to waste.
May 11th, 2009 at 9:22 pmI’ve noticed all sorts of facts in here that point towards the DADT being replaced.
I’ve noticed all sorts of bigotry against it. NO facts.
You know, the last time I saw this argument, the ‘against’ group at least had a factual arguments. It was about condoms breaking during anal sex (I know, has nothing to do with anything) but at least it was an argument. All I’ve seen here are homophobic ideals from people who are too afraid to learn the truth, or people that live in country towns who don’t have the chance. Go join the Neo-Nazis, bigots.
May 11th, 2009 at 10:23 pmAll I see here are STRAIGHT-PHOBIC attacking the decision made by one idiot Captain which happens to be Lesbian Dyke.
May 11th, 2009 at 11:03 pmGay’s are so not in touch with reality. The majority of American think your life style that you call it suck like you do.
The military is so much better off that this Dyke is no longer serving. Perhaps she can go to the biker bar that someone told me where all the bad-assed co ck suck ers are hanging out. Perhaps she will be safer with them. Obviously they want nothing to do with her package.
Wrong.
You are in the minority, stormn.
May 11th, 2009 at 11:30 pmStormn, until you learn English, please shut up.
May 12th, 2009 at 12:00 amDamniana Says:
See, this is exactly my point. Christianity is one of the only religions that claims everyone else is WRONG. Which is funny, because, most of Christianity was formed of all those Pagan religions that you hate so much. You know, Christmas? Midwinter, celebrates the longest day of the year and new years all in one. Or, Easter? Celebrates the coming of spring and fertility.
Unless you can keep your facts straight, Damniana, maybe you should shut up. Easter is tied to the Jewish celebration of Passover, which celebrates the Hebrew escape from Egypt and has nothing to do with fertility or spring. Jesus celebrated Passover in Jerusalem before his crucifixion.
May 12th, 2009 at 5:12 amAre all your other “facts” this hazy?
I appreciate Wiley’s comments because she can disagree without being disagreeable. The problem with gays serving openly in combat units is that there is still a strong cultural bias against it. If it is to happen it should happen slowly, by increments. The military was not desegregated because Harry Truman woke up one morning and decided to do it. It was the end result of a long process.
May 12th, 2009 at 5:20 amWithin my lifetime blacks have gone from Jim Crow laws of segregation and discrimination to a black president. Homosexuals have gone from being criminally sanctioned in this country to being able in several states to legally marry. Full and complete equality is always the goal but it is unrealistic to think it can happen overnight, by the stroke of a pen. Obama is an astute politician and seems to understand this better then anybody. If approached logically, step by step, we will eventually reach the point where bigots of any stripe are marginalized. One president, Clinton, got the ball rolling with “don’t ask don’t tell”. Another president, Bush, left the policy in place. Obama is sending up a trial balloon for the next logical step. It might be his administration, it might be another one, but eventually it will become a non-issue.
May 12th, 2009 at 5:42 amcarsonight Says:
Easter is tied to the Jewish celebration of Passover, which celebrates the Hebrew escape from Egypt and has nothing to do with fertility or spring. Jesus celebrated Passover in Jerusalem before his crucifixion.
————-
If you’ll dig into your records properly, you’ll find that it’s older than that. Tell me- why the bunny?
May 12th, 2009 at 10:17 amWiley,
You are trying to justify this very big wrong(Gays in the Military) by pointing out more of what is wrong with the military. Lets start cleaning ourselves up by not making this bad descision!!!! Then we will take care of our other issues. You sound like my daughter trying to get out of trouble by pointing out someone else did something wrong. Oh and why you are challenging who on here is in the military/mil spouse, I am typing this letter from the IZ(International Zone), Baghdad IRAQ. I am not just a Vet I am a COMBAT VET!!!!!
May 12th, 2009 at 10:34 amOh and by the way if you knew what guys like breasts, legs, brunettes etc just means that you neither walked away from the conversations or never asked them to stop. Oh yeah I know, they would have laughed at you etc etc etc. I am glad you left the military, bc I would hate to have you as a leader!!!! I use bad language on a daily basis(even though I try not to) and on several instances I have had male and female troops ask me to watch it. I apologize and “Drive On”(another Army word). Don’t worry, while I am over here defending AMERICA, I will defend your little fantasy world to!!!!
carsonight Says:
Easter is tied to the Jewish celebration of Passover, which celebrates the Hebrew escape from Egypt and has nothing to do with fertility or spring. Jesus celebrated Passover in Jerusalem before his crucifixion.
————-
Damniana Says:
If you’ll dig into your records properly, you’ll find that it’s older than that. Tell me- why the bunny?
Damniana, my point to you is two fold. First, you will get nowhere in a discussion bashing someone’s faith. That will only make them defensive. One’s core values are largely made up from one’s belief system, whether you subscribe to that belief system or no. Second, to attack a belief system by making statements that are demonstrably false only makes you look silly. Your foregoing is an example. The bunny is a pagan rites of spring symbol that has been Americanized and added to the Easter celebration. That does not mean that Easter came from a pagan tradition, as you claim. The Passover tradition that Easter is tied to dates back more then three thousand years, and is only coincidentally celebrated in the spring. Now, which records do you want to “properly” dig into?
May 12th, 2009 at 1:30 pmYou see, you just agreed with me- that religion has nothing to do with this argument because everyone’s beliefs are different. Notice everyone in here that’s used a religious reason is Christian of some sect?
Anyways, now that I’ve made my point I promise to stop arguing about religion and getting on everyone’s nerves.
May 12th, 2009 at 1:41 pmDamniana Says:
——————————————————————————–
Stormn, until you learn English, please shut up.
I will shut up when I want to one liner. I certainly will not shut for you. I have fought for the right to say whatever the hell, I want. Shut your little weasel pie hole or fill it with something you can suck on. Lollipop would be a good replacement for you generally suck.
May 12th, 2009 at 10:35 pmGay’s have a place other then the military just like this stupid Captain can not keep a secret. Who in the hell wants someone around that has to blab to the whole world their preference for licking crotch. What other secrets would she be willing to give up to lick a bush. I do not mean the G.W. Bush girls either.
May 12th, 2009 at 10:46 pmstormn00007 Says:
I will shut up when I want to one liner.
——————
You say that as though I haven’t put forth actual conversation; unlike you, who gets on here and blathers about your anti-homo problems.
May 12th, 2009 at 11:53 pmGo join Fred Phelps and his family-run cult. No one else cares.
Just a random thought- actually on topic- notice they don’t say anything about Tsao’s motives. For all we know, she could have been near the end of her service, and decided to make a statement- she could have had 3 days left on her contract for all we know. Just a thought.
On the other hand, she could have just started a new term and decided she didn’t want to, and did it for an easy way out. They don’t really say anything on the subject, and that could seriously change some people’s opinions. At least, their opinion about her.
It would be nice if people would mention these things.
May 13th, 2009 at 12:00 amDamniana Says:
You see, you just agreed with me- that religion has nothing to do with this argument because everyone’s beliefs are different. Notice everyone in here that’s used a religious reason is Christian of some sect?
Anyways, now that I’ve made my point I promise to stop arguing about religion and getting on everyone’s nerves.
I did not say religion has nothing to do with this argument…I said that it shouldn’t. The same laws that protect my freedom of belief and religion should protect everybody, so long as their opinions do not harm others.
Back on topic, my point has been that I am not sure our military is ready for a repeal of “don’t ask don’t tell”. Many young men feel threatened on a very basic level when forced to spend time in close proximity with someone whose sexual orientation is different then their own. That is because of the culture, mores, and beliefs they come from. When you are in the military and deployed you can’t leave it at work and go home. To say this is like racial desegregation may not be correct. You can’t hide your race. Our military is too important to experiment with at the risk of loss of unit cohesion.
Those who wish to modify “Don’t ask don’t tell” should understand how archaic our military is. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or UCMJ, the only acceptable sex is between a husband and a wife, in the missionary position. Anything else can result in charges. I am not making this up. Doing it doggy style can result in problems. “Don’t ask don’t tell” protects all our service men and women. As things stand now, what happens in the bedroom stays in the bedroom.
May 13th, 2009 at 2:30 amThe Captain was even rebellious writing to the CIC like a little baby sniveling all the way.
May 13th, 2009 at 5:04 pmYea! The bleeding heart obnoxious Gay’s here believe we really care about their chosen tactics to disobey God. They show how really rebellious they are. They are positioning themselves being anti-Christ. They do not find truth in the Word. The Word being Jesus Christ. The fact is they will all burn in hell and have eternity to understand where they went wrong. Since eternity is endless they will have endless time with Satan to discuss the matter and will not even have to ask for an audience.
For my house we choose the Lord to follow. Peace with God is our hope and we acknowledge it with truth. All have the opportunity to turn from sin for holiness.
Morals and self restraint shows maturity. The lack of Godly morals shows open rebellion to which you will be one day judged. The fire will consume all evil works and workers of evil.
The lies that you follow are allowed by God. He has turned you over to your reprobate mind.
God created man and woman to cohabit-ate. He did not make Sally and Eve nor did He make Adam and Steve for the purpose of sodomy. Getting the picture yet homosexuals?
I get the part where you are a Jesus Waffle (hint: that’s an insult), and I’m sick of listening to Christians preach about how ‘God is our savior’ and ‘You will go to Hell’.
This is why I hate so many Christians.
Especially when all we have to do is mumble ‘god forgive me’ on our deathbeds and BOOM! We’re in Heaven. Weakest God I’ve ever known (No offense to the Christians here who aren’t being pompous bad words).
May 13th, 2009 at 9:41 pmI was hoping this would be an actual conversation and not another gay-bashers party. I’m out of here.
I am still confused as to why no one is addressing the real issue. This is NOT about who this Captain had sex with! It is about the fact that she disobeyed an order that has been in effect since CLINTON made it law. She disobeyed, she got in trouble, she got discharged. Period!
People are “other than honorably” discharged all the time for spouting racist, and anti-American garbage, because it is a violation of the law. And guess what, she violated the law and got discharged.
Wiley . . . you want to talk about how awful all of our service members are and focus only on the negative, I as a navy wife find that offensive. My husband and 98% of the members of our armed services are honorable men and women who just want to do right by their country and their families.
I challenge you to find ANY group of people that doesn’t include people that hold extreme and often offensive ideas and beliefs, but it unfair of you to paint every service member and every Christian for that matter with the same brush as people that most of us would find offensive.
As a Christian and a Navy Wife, I have to tell you that I could care less about someone’s sexuality I feel like that is between them and God ALONE. Meaning, I no more want to hear about your sexuality than I want to hear about your bowel movements or any other inappropriate topic of conversation in the work place.
May 13th, 2009 at 11:23 pmLooks like this thread is dieing, navywife, which is a pity, because your comments are spot on. Under the UCMJ, most service men and women have to keep quiet about their sex life. Are you a young man having sex with someone you are not married to? You could face charges. Are you a couple who like to swing? You could face charges…only IF you talk about it at work. Why are the homosexuals the only ones making an issue of this?
May 14th, 2009 at 1:31 pmDamniana
May 14th, 2009 at 5:46 pmYou do not really hate Christians. You hate what you stand for and that is the reason you hate at all.