Gays in the Military

Discussion in 'Politics' started by B_lrgeggs, Feb 3, 2010.

  1. B_lrgeggs

    B_lrgeggs New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2006
    Messages:
    927
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    mid-atlantic region
    I am suprised I have not seen this thread discussed here. On this matter I think the conservatives protest too much and and liberals soft pedal the issue too much. Personally I don't care either way...I just wish people were more interested in the truth and stop going after their own agendas.....what do you think?
     
  2. B_nyvin

    B_nyvin New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    412
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pensacola FL
    "MARINES HAVE INTEGRITY!!"

    but oh wait, there's don't ask don't tell...............
     
  3. gymfresh

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,659
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Rodinia
    Verified:
    Photo
    The issue of "regulating" gays and lesbians in the military is bullshit. There wasn't even any codified rule or legislation until Reagan came in and stirred the pot; the UCMJ didn't even mention sexual orientation.

    There are some glaring inconsistencies that infuriate me about the entire process. Maybe some of you have more experience with this and can help me understand:

    1. The intended compromise in 1993 was more fully "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue". What happened to the "Don't Pursue" part? It seems that the military cajoled, spied and pursued 10 times more since DADT became law. The number of service members hounded out of the military soared. Wasn't the intended effect that if you yourself didn't want to be outed, then for all intents and purposes you were not considered to be gay and susceptible to separation? Yet it seems like all the DoD did from then on was pursue! Thousands of service members who kept their sexual orientation completely quiet and never wanted to come out, were identified, court martialed and dismissed without honorable discharge. Hundreds were ordered to pay back the cost of their education.

    Was it a mistake to get Congress involved in the process when it passed DADT? Previously there was a Department of Defense directive, promulgated in Ronald Reagan's first year as president, that declared homosexuality inconsistent with military service. In his first week as President, Bill Clinton objected to the implicit assumption that being gay (as a human condition) meant that you were going to act on it inappropriately while in the service. His first instinct was a simple repeal of the directive. But holy hell broke out in the Pentagon and in Congress. The Senate hearings were shameful, with Strom Thurmond refusing to contemplate that the state of being homosexual meant anything other than continually taking it up the ass. He rejected all testimony that suggested one could be a homosexual and never touch another human being or not even engage in anal sex. In essence, he said: If you're not taking it up the ass, you're not really a homo, so what's the problem here? The UCMJ already prohibits anyone taking it up the ass, which is disgusting, by the way.

    2. Which brings me to point #2. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is often cited as the primary basis for excluding homosexuals from military service. It bans sodomy in all forms and by all enlisted personnel or officers, on or off base, for the term of one's service. The thinking goes: if you're gay, you're going to be a top or bottom buttpirate (this is the "propensity" part of the DADT law). Thus, you are immutably inclined to break the law. So you can't serve, unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you can and will be celibate throughout all your service years, at least as regards members of your own sex.

    But isn't it safe to say the overwhelming majority of sodomy by military personnel (oral and anal sex) is committed by heterosexual service members? Between husbands and wives, boyfriends and girlfriends, even casual encounters? Why is the Judge Advocate General's office (JAG -- the District Attorney/DA of the military branches) not aggressively pursuing every alleged incidence of oral or anal sex committed by straight service members? Isn't this illegal discrimination, when the UCMJ as written is not discriminatory at all? My rough guess would be that 9 out of every 10 counts of sodomy by enlisted and officers are committed by heterosexuals with members of the opposite sex. Where are the prosecutions? Is there some writ of mandamus that could be used to compel the JAG to do its job?

    Every service member who has gotten (male) or given (female) a blowjob needs to be court-martialed immediately! Any male who has performed cunnilingus or female who has received it must be court-martialed immediately. Any male who has had anal sex with a female, or been penetrated in any way, must be court-martialed immediately. Ditto for female service members who have engaged in these acts with males. There is no leeway on this if it occurred at any point in the timeframe of one's military service.

    3. If open homosexuality is absolutely incompatible with military service, why cannot:

    a) Gay youth ages 18-25 refuse to comply with registration for the Selective Service? They can never serve anyway. Yet, to fail to register is a federal offense -- up to $250,000 fine and/or 5 years in prison. You're also ineligible for university financial aid or any government job.

    b) Anyone choose to leave the Reserves or active duty at any time simply by stating that they are homosexual? There ought not be any further discussion... they are ineligible for deployment. However, the Department of Defense reserves the right to "ignore" or selectively enforce DADT at its discretion. Sorry, brass, but what's good for the goose is good for the gander. You can't eat your cake and have it, too.

    c) US service members refuse to serve alongside gay Canadian, British, Australian or other NATO or Pacific Command forces? Good God, our sensitive boys and girls may be force to share the battlefield or **gasp** shower and sleep with openly gay and lesbian members of coalition forces. Oh wait, they've already done that without incident. It's homoamericans that are the problem.

    So far, more than 13,000 men and women have been involuntarily separated from the armed forces under DADT -- including many of the most talented Arabic-language and other linguists, hundreds trained by the prestigious Defense Language Institute in Monterey, CA (they were also commanded to pay back the full cost of their instruction). It is staggering how much this hampers our diplomatic and wartime efforts.

    So now we have Adm. Mike Mullen saying rescinding DADT is the only honorable thing to do, because it inherently fosters dishonesty. John McCain is hootin' and hollerin' it should be kept because service members are not ready to change yet. And Colin Powell has done a 180° about-face on the issue since 1993 without explaining exactly why.

    Obama was a political dolt for even mentioning this in his State of the Union Address. He should have quietly started the process with the Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, then when he had all his cards lined up used the White House congressional liaison staff to start getting the repeal ball rolling in the House and Senate. Instead, he's stirred up another hornet's nest à la Clinton. And says it will take a year or more (of open fighting, no doubt). Jackass.
     
    #3 gymfresh, Feb 4, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2010
  4. maxcok

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,392
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    #4 maxcok, Feb 4, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2010
  5. maxcok

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,392
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    McCain vs. McCain on DADT:

    In 2006, preparing to run for president, asked what he would do on DADT: "The day that the leadership of the military comes to me and says, ‘Senator, we ought to change the policy,’ then I think we ought to consider seriously changing it."

    Yesterday, as the highest ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee: "At this moment of immense hardship for our armed services, we should not be seeking to overturn the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy."

    Michael Russnow: John McCain's No Longer a Hero


    Meanwhile, over on NPR, Melissa Block interviews Duncan Hunter Jr. from California, son of former Chair of the House Armed Services Committee, who rode daddy's coattails into a congressional seat. He talks about the problem of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgenders and hermaphrodites serving in the armed forces.
    I kid you not:

    BLOCK: You are not in favor of a repeal of dont ask, dont tell. Why not?

    Rep. HUNTER: No, because I think that its bad for the cohesiveness and the unity of the military units, especially those that are in close combat, that are in close quarters in country right now. It's not the time to do it. I think it's - the military is not civilian life. And I think the folks who have been in the military that have been in these very close situations with each other, there has to be a special bond there. And I think that bond is broken if you open up the military to transgenders, to hermaphrodites, to gays and lesbians.

    BLOCK: Transgenders and hermaphrodites.

    Rep. HUNTER: Yeah, thats going to be part of this whole thing. Its not just gays and lesbians. Its a whole gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual community. If you're going to let anybody no matter what preference - what sexual preference they have that means the military is going to probably let everybody in. Its going to be like civilian life and the I think that that would be detrimental for the military.

    Full audio here: Rep. Hunter: Repealing 'Don't Ask' Will Hurt Military : NPR


    On a tombstone in Congressional Cemetery, not far from the Capitol:

    When I was in the military, they gave me a medal for killing two men
    and a discharge for loving one.


     
    #5 maxcok, Feb 4, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2010
  6. unabear09

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,083
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    24
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    the people that run this country (and a huge chunk of people that elected them) are such fucking idiots. WHO GIVES A SHIT WHO YOU LOVE OR FUCK?!?! If you are gay, then its your right to profess it. Why should who you love or prefer to fuck impact your ability to do ANYTHING? Its 2010 for fucks sake, not 1810!
     
  7. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    LOVED! McCain's response to the repeal of DADT. An affirmative "NO!" And to think I had the opportunity to vote AGAINST him and all he stands for. Such a "great" military hero. Imagine sacrificing so much just so you can continue to discriminate against the convenient minority of your choice, sexual minority or any other. Such a great Republican. The GOP is wet and messy with pride.
     
  8. Bob Ross

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,237
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    120
    Gender:
    Male
    Verified:
    Photo
    Notwithstanding the obvious and sad fact that his own daughter is a lesbian: as was "reported" on the Daily Show: John McCain said a few years ago that if the military brass supported removing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the U.S.A. that he thought Congress should "seriously consider" it...Then when they make such recomendation, he goes back on his statement and criticizes the top brass! Thoughts on this?
     
  9. Service4hung

    Service4hung New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    21
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Miami FL
    He's old. People have a harder time accepting change the more they age. He justified his opposition by pointing out that the brass also opposed gays in the military - now he doesn't have that excuse, but his feelings haven't changed. As that generation dies off, it will be less and less of an issue.
     
  10. Bob Ross

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    1,237
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    120
    Gender:
    Male
    Verified:
    Photo
    Good point. But I will say its dissapointing. He is a man I respect, but apparently he forgets his own principles...
     
  11. D_Barf Brooks

    D_Barf Brooks Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2008
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't get it. Before Regan was around it didn't matter if you liked to fuck cats! If you were an American citizen and wanted (or were forced) to serve your country then you did it.

    Also, McCain was in the military... you think he never served with a gay man? WTF, he did, and he knows it. There have ALWAYS been gay men in the service (EVEN IN WWI and WWII) it is just that conservative nut jobs like Regan had to go and make trouble for em. Point being, McCain it a dumb shit.

    I swear some people think gays just APPEARED in 1965... It has been a lifestyle for as along as there have been people on this planet.

    Being old doesn't explain McCain (or any other old fart's) reason for hating gay people. They just have power, and it is a group they can (want) to control.
     
  12. maxcok

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,392
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere

    There was a thread started on this a few days ago, when Secretary of Defense Mike Mullen testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee. You are all welcome to come over there:





    Thread merge anybody?
     
    #12 maxcok, Feb 6, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2010
  13. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    The Great 'Mericuhn War Hero, Oliver "Ollie" up North is mad as Hell and is warning that if DADT is repealed and gays are allowed to openly serve in the US military, chaplins will be forced to perform namblea? (manbla? Hell, I don't even know how to spell it) marriages between men and young boyze. And even worse stuff, too.

    To view what a person completely disconnected from reality looks like (after all, Starimpooper no longer has any verified photos), go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igG3FQTT4OAhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igG3FQTT4OA

    It's not funny. It's not shiny. But it'll give you the wlllies (and not the good kind).

    Enjoy.
     
  14. Rikter8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    Messages:
    4,488
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    51
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    MI
  15. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    I believe it's been truncated (the neo con way of saying "edited"), but that's a very good question. I'll continue to look into it. :smile:
     
  16. Flashy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2007
    Messages:
    8,097
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    which one of his daughters is a lesbian???
     
  17. maxcok

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,392
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere

    Probably the ugly one.








    :cool:
     
  18. finsuptx

    finsuptx New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    See, I hate when I come across a thread that I have intimate knowledge of (I am and gay and served in the Marine Corps) but the thread devolves into the same kind of childishness we see on the House and Senate floor before I can respond. Most of you think you know everything because you read it somewhere in a newspaper or on the Onion or Jon Stewart's Daily Show. Tacky Maxcok.
     
  19. maxcok

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,392
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    Wow. Did you bother to read what I posted earlier in this one page thread? You might change your tune. And FYI, though I have not served in the military myself, I have many friends who have, some of whom were discharged, including my roommate who was also a Marine. This is an issue I have fought long and hard for, for more than 20 years. Nothing wrong with a little humor now and then, is there? You might want to reconsider before you jump to more conclusions.
     
    #19 maxcok, Feb 7, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2010
  20. finsuptx

    finsuptx New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    No reconsideration required on my part. Good day.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted