General Peter Pace speaks...

[Shelby]

We should really clean up our own house before attacking other people's messes.

Evasive but true.

 

[Lex]

Evasive but true.

It's not evasive at all. You are trying to deflect attention on this issue.

 

[silentc]

A jog, that's a good idea. Oh wait, there's that A&F billboard down the street. I guess I better leave my MP3 player at home too, I'm not real sure about what they are saying in that song. Maybe I could just hide in a dark room, then maybe I wouldn't be blasted by the gay agenda that is rampant everywhere (not just on the computer).

hurtful, derogatory and ignorant not to mention counter-productive

That's right, and fuck the niggers, spics and bitches too. God bless America!

The man has an opinion. He isn't apologizing and neither would I. I understand this site, and enjoy it. I have always been respectful of everyone's opinion. Why don't you try it.

There are a few people here who just can't. I've already been flamed in two threads for suggestion incest is immorale and believing that religion shouldn't necessarily be abolished. By the way, I think you're right. Its just his opinion. In this country everyone is allowed, or used to be allowed, to have one.

 

[silentc]

I know how we can reduce our military prescence in Iraq by 40% or more in less than a month: Let all the gay soldiers (closeted) come home immediately. Tell them no harm will come of them and that they will keep their full benefit packages.

When all that are left to fight are straight people, we'll see how fucking righteous and indignant they seem.

Ignorant fucktards. All of them (that feel that gays should not serve or must serve in silence).

Are you actually suggesting that 40% or more of the soldiers in Iraq are homosexual? I'm not saying gays shouldn't serve in the military. I'm just suggestion that your assumption is a little questionable.

 

[Lex]

Are you actually suggesting that 40% or more of the soldiers in Iraq are homosexual? I'm not saying gays shouldn't serve in the military. I'm just suggestion that your assumption is a little questionable.

It was a sarcastic comment, not an assumption. There are many more gay men and women serving than we think. We've already lost tons of translators and other crucial soliders due to DADT.

 

[silentc]

It was a sarcastic comment, not an assumption. There are many more gay men and women serving than we think. We've already lost tons of translators and other crucial soliders due to DADT.

I see. I've got something to say about DADT, though.

I'm don't think there's anything wrong with the DADT policy. I disagree with its underlying insinuation there is something wrong with homosexuality, BUT sexuality has no place in the military. There is no reason to even discuss someone's sexual preference. With the DADT policy, it never even comes up just as it shouldn't. They don't ask, because it shouldn't be their concern. Soldier's don't tell, because there is no reason to. It shouldn't affect their performance.

 

[DC_DEEP]

What is there in humans that causes us to need someone, or some group, to look down on, or to fear?

There are two ways to deal with feelings of inadequacy: actually take steps to make yourself better, or depict other people as being inferior to yourself, so that (in your own mind) you appear better without the effort. Go figure.

This is the U.S. where each of us is entitled to our own opinions. He clearly stated that was his opinion. Demanding an apology is assinine, they would be hollow meaningless words. There are gay people in powerful positions that are influencing society just as much as this guy. Everyday there is something in the media jamming homosexuality in everyone's face whether they like it or not. Ahh, Land of the Free.

He does indeed have an opinion. So do I. His opinion happens to differ from mine. Whose opinion should become policy? And every day (not necessarily everyday) there is something in the media jamming heterosexuality down my throat, whether I like it or not.

<...>
Maybe I could just hide in a dark room, then maybe I wouldn't be blasted by the gay agenda that is rampant everywhere (not just on the computer).
<...>
The man has an opinion. He isn't apologizing and neither would I. I understand this site, and enjoy it. I have always been respectful of everyone's opinion. Why don't you try it.

I'm not sure that you have been respectful of everyone's opinion. I won't suggest that you try it.

GET OFF THIS BOARD and send your raves to Comments@Whitehouse.gov

I sent:
- - - - -
While I fully support General Pace's right to hold intolerant views and to express them, those views disqualify him from a position of leadership.

When it comes to bigotry, we must have a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

Since he told, we have no choice - General Pace must go. We can't give the impression we harbor bigots at the highest levels of leadership.

-Ron Low

Good advice. I spend more on postage to my senators and representatives than I do on new socks in any given year.

Actually we realized that's all that would be left in the Army, so we changed the new slogan to "Army Strong" several months ago. YouTube - Army Strong (on a total sidenote, I get chills everytime I watch the ad...)

As a military member, I really don't give a shit if you eat pussy, suck dick, whatever. I'm more concerned about how you do your job - what a crazy concept, I know! Sexuality has no place in the work environment. Do what you want off-duty, in the privacy of your own home.

My prediction is that in about 10 years, and "don't ask, don't tell" will be a thing of the past.

Perfect. Most soldiers, sailors, and Marines I was around during my tour of duty pretty much held the same opinion, except to "fit in" they usually project a more homophobic image. Also, I don't know about other units, but most of my tour of duty was attached to the First Marine Division. My platoon was a very close-knit group, and people would make small talk, ask about who you were dating, etc etc etc. We also had official functions and recreational activities where we were encouraged to "bring a date." Some of us, obviously, really weren't allowed to bring a date.

Are you actually suggesting that 40% or more of the soldiers in Iraq are homosexual? I'm not saying gays shouldn't serve in the military. I'm just suggestion that your assumption is a little questionable.

Sure, 40% of the soldiers in Iraq are homosexual. Everyone knows that.

I see. I've got something to say about DADT, though.

I'm don't think there's anything wrong with the DADT policy. I disagree with its underlying insinuation there is something wrong with homosexuality, BUT sexuality has no place in the military. There is no reason to even discuss someone's sexual preference. With the DADT policy, it never even comes up just as it shouldn't. They don't ask, because it shouldn't be their concern. Soldier's don't tell, because there is no reason to. It shouldn't affect their performance.

But it does come up. Have you served in any branch of the military? Especially in garrison, it's like any other workplace, and when you spend that much time with the same people every day, you make small talk, you make friends, and you see your friends away from the work place.

In field exercises or in combat, my job was perimeter guard - my whole unit's job. Move in first, set up the command area, then guard it. After I got my foxhole dug in and squared away, if enemy fire was close by, the LAST thing on my mind would be whether or not the person next to me was thinking sexy thoughts about me... and I doubt that it crossed his mind, either. We were worried about staying alive, not who did or did not want to fuck us.

 

[Lex]

...

I'm don't think there's anything wrong with the DADT policy. I disagree with its underlying insinuation there is something wrong with homosexuality, BUT sexuality has no place in the military. There is no reason to even discuss someone's sexual preference. ....

When rules and policies are made thay restrict the actions and behaviors of ONE segment of the population in a way that other segments are not restricted, that is called discrimination.

I don't recall any policy that prevents straight married Marines, for example, from openly discussing fucking, kissing, eating their girlfriends, wives or local prostitutes.

When they get told to not discuss pussy around me I will feel wholly comfortable not discussing dick around them. Oh, I forgot, those straight Marines show and talk about cock all the time, too. So I should be able to talk about cock too!

Right.


Everyone or No one. Just SOMEone(s) = discrimination.

 

[Shelby]

So I take it everyone agrees that men and women in the military should not have separate bunks and/or showers.

Or if so, why?

 

[DC_DEEP]

So I take it everyone agrees that men and women in the military should not have separate bunks and/or showers.

Or if so, why?

I'm not sure where that comes from. But I'll answer it anyway: There should be facilities available for those who want to live in a single-gender environment, and also for those who would prefer a mixed-gender environment. On most bases, there are a number of barracks; they could see if there is any interest in the mixed environment, and if there is, make it a reality.

But I still don't see what that has to do with a prohibition on certain sexual orientations.

 

[Shelby]

I think the military fears that romantic liasons could reduce the effectiveness of a combat unit.

 

[Rikter8]

I think the military fears that romantic liasons could reduce the effectiveness of a combat unit.

Just my .02..

I think that's a very good reason, and makes sense, but unfortunately it's used as a crutch moreso than not, and a blanket to exclude.

Working in a corporate environment, in a medium size community with everyone living close by, you learn to "Live" with these people on a daily basis.
Learning to live with peoples differences is how you get the job done.
You compromise, you negotiate.

I agree that sexuality shouldn't be something that's paraded about in the workplace, wherever that may be.
But we also shouldn't have soldiers fearing for their lives, not sure if the "fellow soldier" or the enemy will fire upon him.

It's that co-worker trust that must be built to have a strong workforce, and strong army. If nobody can trust or learn to live with whom they work with, how productive is that??

I work in an office where we have closeted gay people, and open lesbians.
Co-worker parties, traveling home, and working with these people on a day to day basis help to enforce trust and respect for everyones view.

I don't agree with throwing a smoke bomb in the bar...
That's totally uncalled for and they should be thrown in Federal prison for attempted manslaughter or something of the like.
What would have happened if the bar patrons rushed the door and several were killed, and injured?

As for "gay ads being shoved in "our" face"....

Sorry bub... but I've had boobie catchers and "Please her now" magazine ads shoved down my throat in nearly EVERY magazine I read.
(Mens Health, every issue, Wood Magazine (?!?!), Hot Rod, Hot Rod Pontiac, etc)
How do you think that makes me feel? I quit subscribing to Mens Health specifically for this reason. I really got sick of reading about women.

I won't even discuss the blow up doll they tied to the back of a pickup truck in celebration of the new porn shop on the main drag where schoolbusses drop off K12 and Intermediate students....

 

[DC_DEEP]

There are a few people here who just can't. I've already been flamed in two threads for suggestion incest is immorale and believing that religion shouldn't necessarily be abolished. By the way, I think you're right. Its just his opinion. In this country everyone is allowed, or used to be allowed, to have one.

Can you stay on topic? This is not the incest thread, nor the religion thread, it's the General Pace thread. You keep bringing up those other threads in every thread you post in. You are comparing kumquats to oranges.

 

[madame_zora]

As for "gay ads being shoved in "our" face"....

Sorry bub... but I've had boobie catchers and "Please her now" magazine ads shoved down my throat in nearly EVERY magazine I read.
(Mens Health, every issue, Wood Magazine (?!?!), Hot Rod, Hot Rod Pontiac, etc)
How do you think that makes me feel? I quit subscribing to Mens Health specifically for this reason. I really got sick of reading about women.

I won't even discuss the blow up doll they tied to the back of a pickup truck in celebration of the new porn shop on the main drag where schoolbusses drop off K12 and Intermediate students....

Honey, baby- those comments are not reflexive! When someone is complaining that YOUR group is shoving things in their face, they are not suggesting they will stop shoving their views in yours!

Whenever a group is in the majority, they get that feel-good rush that they are right, because "everyone thinks like me". It's easy to dismiss the rights of a minority group, always has been. Usually, the only way things change is when the majority shames itself so badly by its own bad behavior that their original argument is FINALLY seen for what it is- just another in a long line of futile attempts to justify bigotry. I wish there was an easier way.

I hope the heterosexuals here will read this, and really try to understand what it's like to be gay and have straight sex shoved in your face constantly. Movies, advertisements, literature, music, art- every aspect of our lives.

 

[DC_DEEP]

I'm still waiting for musclebare9 to explain to me exactly what my agenda is.

 

[LeeEJ]

"The man's got an opinion," they say. "So what, it's just an opinion," they say.

Ahem... Rules are created because of opinions.

Why aren't gays allowed in the military? Because people think that they shouldn't be allowed.

Wake up. Opinions count.

 

[musclebare9]

I believe each day is a new day. Enjoy it - learn, laugh and move on. I appreciate a good debate. That is educated discussion not controlled by emotional outbursts or infantile name calling.

I also like to stick to the topic of a thread and not hijack it off the tracks. Thus said, I haved avoided a response to DC_DEEP. I considered starting a new thread with the topic of "The Gay Agenda" but I believe that would require a significant amount of my time in responses and cause more division amongst the LPSG family. This is a site dedicated to Penis Support not social issues. I will post my response here in hopes that it remains viewed by the few who have been following this thread.

After reading the following you may claim ignorance and pick up your copy at the Amazon link.

Set in the late 1980s, in a book called 'After the Ball,' where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior — in a decade-long time frame.... They admit it privately, but they will not say that publicly. In their private publications, homosexual activists make it very clear that there is an agenda. The six-point agenda that they laid out in 1989 was explicit: Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible... Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers... Give homosexual protectors a just cause... Make gays look good... Make the victimizers look bad... Get funds from corporate America.

http://www.amazon.com/After-Ball-America-Conquer-Hatred/dp/0452264987

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Kirk

http://www.answers.com/topic/marshall-kirk


Have a good day and keep smiling it's just life.

 

[swordfishME]

The Chairman of the JCS expressed his opnion on the status of gays in the military. Should he have been more careful of his position while expressing his views? Absolutely. This however does not mean that it disqualifies his from holding the position that he holds. Everyone of us has certains "morals" that we grew up with. I personally think that pedophiles should be castrated. This make me a bigot to end number of pedophiles.

I totally agree that he should not have rendered a personal opnion while on the Job, does not mean he is not good at what he does and needs to be removed. He has not done anything wrong.

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

Anyway, the millitary is not a "equal rights" organisation by proxy. The main purpose is to defend a nation, mainly by killing the shit out of everyone else. So by proxy they can-will-do place bias. Maybe there are women in front line infantry regiments? I know the UK biases against that.

As for homosexuality, it's the last taboo, heteros instinctively think that gays are only going to end up fucking them regardless of any social or decent mores, I feel the easiest metaphor would be to imagine a only-women corps, and let a male loose and see what the women would think.

And finally, it seems saddening that the only aspiration of a gay man (who probably had a traumatic coming out) is to serve as living target practice by a faceless government. Our nations need more gay cops to spread equal justice.

Do it.

 

[fortiesfun]

After reading the following you may claim ignorance and pick up your copy at the Amazon link.

Set in the late 1980s, in a book called 'After the Ball,' where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior — in a decade-long time frame.... They admit it privately, but they will not say that publicly.

Ah, the Lavender Menace laid out for all to see.

With respect, however, I can't see that the Gay rights campaign, or any other civil rights campaign for that matter, was conducted in secret or that there is anything conspiratorial about making one's case publicly.

Somehow you write about this as if it were a subliminal campaign to change people's minds against their will. In fact, the book you reference is basically about how to tell the truth more loudly than those who would spread disinformation about gays and trusting that mainstream America will decide the right thing when given full access to the facts.

As long as anti-gay campaigns are conducted openly from every right wring pulpit in the country, doesn't it make sense that gay people would seek equal time to correct the misimpressions created by religious propagandists? That's not an "agenda," its self-defense!