"Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

[Adrian69702006]

You might not care about the Anglican Communion and that, of course, is your God given right. However for some loyal Anglicans, seeing the church they love torn apart by issues which shouldn't even be on the agenda, is heartbreaking. It certainly pains me. I think I'll desist but last week I was sorely tempted to write to the editor of the Church Times and ask if it would be possible to have a week when the paper didn't carry news, features or debate on the subject of human sexuality - or rather the small part of human sexuality about which the church seems obsessed. It's certainly something that could be given up for Lent without too many long suffering readers missing it.:smile:

 

[LeeEJ]

... seeing the church they love torn apart ...

Well, really, that's nothing new. Churches of all flavors have gone through upheavals repeatedly throughout religious history. Even the invention of the first church was an upheaval of its own.

So, this is just another one -- another fork in the road, so to speak. Some people will go left, some will go right (political pun not intended). Some will follow the gourd, some will follow the shoe, even as others claim that the shoe is really a sandal.

But I digress... maybe it's because I'm up waaayyy too late, likely because of the energy drink I had a few hours ago.

 

[playainda336]

I really do not care, not one single iota, about the Anglican Communion. And in turn, they should not care, not one single iota, about me and my private life. I agree with your statement that "what consenting adults do in private should be regarded as their own business." I don't agree that there is any wisdom at all in "don't ask, don't tell." Heterosexual couples can keep their copulation in private, but they don't have to hide other aspects of their lives. "Don't ask, don't tell" requires same-gender couples to deny major portions of their lives that have nothing at all to do with copulation or sex.

While I don't care about the Anglican Communion (WTF is that?), Don't Ask, Don't Tell (outside of the military) only keeps what you do in private...in private, I thought.

What other aspects of your life are you required to hide, else. I told you I really don't understand...maybe I missed it in the reading the thread or don't remember...either way remind me.

You might not care about the Anglican Communion and that, of course, is your God given right. However for some loyal Anglicans, seeing the church they love torn apart by issues which shouldn't even be on the agenda, is heartbreaking. It certainly pains me. I think I'll desist but last week I was sorely tempted to write to the editor of the Church Times and ask if it would be possible to have a week when the paper didn't carry news, features or debate on the subject of human sexuality - or rather the small part of human sexuality about which the church seems obsessed. It's certainly something that could be given up for Lent without too many long suffering readers missing it.:smile:

Anglican as in Roman Catholics?

I'll keep my trap shut about that one.

 

[DC_DEEP]

You might not care about the Anglican Communion and that, of course, is your God given right. However for some loyal Anglicans, seeing the church they love torn apart by issues which shouldn't even be on the agenda, is heartbreaking. It certainly pains me. I think I'll desist but last week I was sorely tempted to write to the editor of the Church Times and ask if it would be possible to have a week when the paper didn't carry news, features or debate on the subject of human sexuality - or rather the small part of human sexuality about which the church seems obsessed. It's certainly something that could be given up for Lent without too many long suffering readers missing it.:smile:

I apologize, Adrian, I really did not mean for that to come across the way it did. I was just simply saying how confusing and frustrating it is for me, that churches in general take such a keen interest in my private life, even when I don't want them to.

But just a little irony... the Anglican Communion (and the Lutheran church, and all protestant denominations) would not exist if it were not for all these heartbreaking, divisive issues.

And you are perfectly correct, perhaps the catholic (as in the Nicene creed, meaning universal) church should give up hotly contested issues for lent.

 

[Matthew]

Don't Ask, Don't Tell (outside of the military) only keeps what you do in private...in private, I thought.

What other aspects of your life are you required to hide, else. I told you I really don't understand...maybe I missed it in the reading the thread or don't remember...either way remind me.

It's not just about who you sneak off to have sex with behind closed doors, it's also about who your partners are, who you choose to love, who you choose to spend time with including as a couple. Heterosexual people are not expected to compartmentalize their lives that way, nor to hide their romantic lives with partners, and queers shouldn't have to either.

A system under which you have to deny a fundamental truth about who you are, under which you may receive serious consequences if that truth is exposed, is by its nature an unjust and oppressive system. The bottom line is that Don't Shit Don't Smell creates a substantially different standard for gays vs. straights and thus is discriminatory on its face.

 

[Lucky_Luke]

Am I correct in the belief that the United Kingdom has removed these laws from its armed forces?

I believe the USA is the only western country that legally bans gays & lesbians from serving.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Exactly right, Matthew. playainda, it is so much more than just who sticks what body parts where. Granted, sex acts should be performed in private.

But at formal dinners, functions, recreational activities on base, heterosexual servicemembers may bring spouses or significant others. Homosexual servicemembers may not. Consider the "innocent" conversations that coworkers may have:

"You and your girlfriend want to go out to dinner with us tonight?"

"Who are you bringing to the Birthday Ball?"

"Everyone else is bringing a date, are you?"

"I've worked with you for 3 years now, but you never tell us about yourself. Dating anyone?"

Et cetera, on and on. Coworkers, especially in a military setting, often want to get to know one another better. In the military setting, these are people with whom you may, at some point, entrust your very life. And it is human nature to want to see others in a relationship.

In the military, gays and lesbians must hide and/or "re-invent" almost every aspect of their life away from work. It is not an easy situation to be in. Trust me, I know, I have been there.

 

[dudepiston]

Yes, and according to your definition of what an oppressive system is, which I agree with 100%, American society as a whole is an unjust and oppresive system. Many groups - not just gays - are kept down for being who they are; are discriminated against for how they look, how they worship, their ethnic background. What a monumental task we have to try to fix these societal ills. We lose more ground every day, it seems.

It's not just about who you sneak off to have sex with behind closed doors, it's also about who your partners are, who you choose to love, who you choose to spend time with including as a couple. Heterosexual people are not expected to compartmentalize their lives that way, nor to hide their romantic lives with partners, and queers shouldn't have to either.

A system under which you have to deny a fundamental truth about who you are, under which you may receive serious consequences if that truth is exposed, is by its nature an unjust and oppressive system. The bottom line is that Don't Shit Don't Smell creates a substantially different standard for gays vs. straights and thus is discriminatory on its face.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Yes, and according to your definition of what an oppressive system is, which I agree with 100%, American society as a whole is an unjust and oppresive system. Many groups - not just gays - are kept down for being who they are; are discriminated against for how they look, how they worship, their ethnic background. What a monumental task we have to try to fix these societal ills. We lose more ground every day, it seems.

Actually the task should not be nearly as daunting as it currently is. If our major social institutions (and by that, I mean The Church and The Government) would stop PROMOTING discrimination, almost certainly our society at large would follow suit.

To The Church (meaning all churches and faiths, in general): your basic tenets tell you it is wrong to be oppressive. Stop being oppressive.

To The Government: first, you have no vested interest in promoting discrimination against groups of people. Second, you have no authority to promote discrimination against groups of people. Third, it is against your best interests and counterproductive to promote discrimination against groups of people.

 

[Lex]

It's not just about who you sneak off to have sex with behind closed doors, it's also about who your partners are, who you choose to love, who you choose to spend time with including as a couple. Heterosexual people are not expected to compartmentalize their lives that way, nor to hide their romantic lives with partners, and queers shouldn't have to either.

A system under which you have to deny a fundamental truth about who you are, under which you may receive serious consequences if that truth is exposed, is by its nature an unjust and oppressive system. The bottom line is that Don't Shit Don't Smell creates a substantially different standard for gays vs. straights and thus is discriminatory on its face.

Exactly.

Playainda--Understanding Matthew's points here are key (if you really want to escape the homophobe label). Think simple things--non-sexual: A kiss on the cheek, a hug, holding hands.

Two men can't do that in the service. One of my best buds lives in a military town-- DADT promotes secrecy and shame where there need not be any. I could have fucked up to 3 military officers over the course of my stay there. Ignoring something does not make it do away. Denying it does not make it any less true.

Actually the task should not be nearly as daunting as it currently is. If our major social institutions (and by that, I mean The Church and The Government) would stop PROMOTING discrimination, almost certainly our society at large would follow suit.

To The Church (meaning all churches and faiths, in general): your basic tenets tell you it is wrong to be oppressive. Stop being oppressive.

To The Government: first, you have no vested interest in promoting discrimination against groups of people. Second, you have no authority to promote discrimination against groups of people. Third, it is against your best interests and counterproductive to promote discrimination against groups of people.

Thank you.

 

[Sklar]

I heard on the radio today that there are some members of Congress that are now looking to totally lift the ban on gays in the military. This time they seem to be serious about it.

 

[DC_DEEP]

I heard on the radio today that there are some members of Congress that are now looking to totally lift the ban on gays in the military. This time they seem to be serious about it.

Could be, but their past behavior in Congress makes me cynical. I wonder if any of those are up for re-election any time soon?

 

[Sklar]

Found it:

FOXNews.com - New Push to Drop 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum

 

[BIGBULL29]

The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is proof of one thing and one thing only: homophobia at its finest

 

[playainda336]

Exactly.

Playainda--Understanding Matthew's points here are key (if you really want to escape the homophobe label). Think simple things--non-sexual: A kiss on the cheek, a hug, holding hands.

Two men can't do that in the service. One of my best buds lives in a military town-- DADT promotes secrecy and shame where there need not be any. I could have fucked up to 3 military officers over the course of my stay there. Ignoring something does not make it do away. Denying it does not make it any less true.

Thank you.

I could really care less about the label. I think it's BS, people were all on Stronzo bandwagon one day and the next shouting "Crucify Him!"...but nobody wanted to step up when he was trolling on my threads before. If you wanna call me one, fine. Have some substantiation behind it and then come back to me. Otherwise you're just blowing smoke out your...=X

I can see some points on both sides in this. If someone asks, yes you should be able to tell. But I have an aversion to PDAs of any format so if it's "acceptable" for hetero people to make PDAs on a constant basis it doesn't make it any more right. But meh. I hear your points.

 

[Lex]

...
If someone asks, yes you should be able to tell. But I have an aversion to PDAs of any format so if it's "acceptable" for hetero people to make PDAs on a constant basis it doesn't make it any more right. But meh. I hear your points.

Right? So, you plan to inject your morality on people's ability to display affection?

The big issue here is that I should not have to limit any display of affection (Short of private sexual acts) because you don't want to see it. That's insane to even suggest that I should.

I should be able to hold my BF's hand, kiss him on the cheek (or a pec on the lips), hug and all that just like every straight couple you see walking down the street. And in fact, I often do. When I picked him up and dropped him off at the airport I hugged AND kissed him.

When we had dinner with DC DEEP, Bliss and NIC160, I hugged DC and his hubby and kissed them both-right there in the restaurant. Just like I kissed and hugged Bliss (a woman).

As I said your issues with PDA are yours and need not be legislated to restrict the actions of others. Our U.S. Constitution expressly prohibits that type of infringement (in theory).

 

[playainda336]

Like I said. I hear your points.

 

[Male Bonding etc]

Apparently Marine Sargeant Alva, the first Marine wounded in Iraq, is coming out, and he is testifying in Congress regarding Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Our thread, or rather playainda336's, is quite timely.

 

[Lex]

Apparently Marine Sargeant Alva, the first Marine wounded in Iraq, is coming out, and he is testifying in Congress regarding Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Our thread, or rather playainda336's, is quite timely.

Yup. Here is the Link.

By Larry Shaughnessy
CNN


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Staff Sgt. Eric Alva was one of the first Americans -- perhaps the first -- to be wounded in Iraq when he lost his leg to a land mine.

But for years, Alva kept a secret: He is gay.

"Who would have guessed that the first American wounded was a gay Marine?" Alva said Wednesday.

Alva's service and sacrifice in Iraq earned him medals, media attention and a meeting with President Bush and the first lady.

Now, he wants to use his place in history to win support for a proposed law to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the U.S. armed forces.
He announced his homosexuality at a Wednesday news conference on Capitol Hill, where he called for the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the service to be abandoned.
(Watch Alva speak on Capitol Hillhttp://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.5/main/icon_video.gif)

"I'm an American who fought for his country and for the protection and the rights and freedoms of all American citizens -- not just some of them, but all of them," Alva said.

Since the Clinton administration instituted the policy, service members who reveal their homosexuality face immediate discharge. Even troops with crucial skills, like Arabic translators, have been expelled.

Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Massachusetts, has reintroduced a bill to lift the ban. It has failed before, and he admits it won't be easy this time, but he says it's not a lost cause.

"It will be an uphill climb," Meehan said. "But I think the November elections can only mean good things."

Meehan said his bill has 109 bipartisan co-sponsors in the House, and he said he expects that number to grow.

"The momentum is clear," he said. "It is time to end this outdated and discriminatory policy."

Gay service members are discharged
In 2005, more than 700 members of the U.S. military were discharged because of their sexual orientation. Others, like former Marine Sgt. Brian Fricke, left on their own rather than keep their secret.

"We cannot count those, gay and straight, who have chosen to leave rather than serve in silence like myself," Fricke said. "I'm proud to be a Marine, but I decided not to re-enlist so that I can live openly and honestly."

There is no indication that the White House or the Pentagon is willing to change the policy. But just two months ago, the man who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when the policy was introduced indicated he was having second thoughts about "Don't ask, don't tell."

"Last year I held a number of meetings with gay soldiers and Marines," retired Army Gen. John Shalikashvili wrote in The New York Times. "These conversations showed me just how much the military has changed, and that gays and lesbians can be accepted by their peers."

 

[B_Hung Muscle]

oops. wrong thread......