DADT signed into law

The keyword here is fear, and in this case, it's VERY much similar to the case with blacks and women wanting to serve in the military. Blacks out of, as you said, white fear. The feeling that black military officials would try and kill them behind their backs. Women were feared for a great number of reasons, and the major one would be male insecurity. But on the other hand, you could argue the idea that women had a helping hand when it came to population. These are more sexist notions.

For you to say that women in combat roles would make a better comparison creates the impression that gays should be treated as a different species. Gays, who are men and women, are just as capable of doing the job as any of the heterosexual men and women. The problem isn't within gays openly serving, it's the weak-minded soldiers who can't get pass the fact that their comrade can come out openly. Weak-minded as in individuals who are trained to kill and protect this country, yet can't seem to get over their biases and broken stereotypes.

Furthermore, YMRA, since you're part of the military certainly you were stationed in places where you came across other military officials from other countries like UK, Canada, and Israel, right? These three particular countries have gays serving openly. They all would tell you that there are more important things to worry about than the sexual orientation of the person when in the battlefield.

 

The problem is that is has already happened. With the push to get the military accept minor felonies, and non-violent crime, and those with GEDs. What this did was change the over all face and make up of the military.

Crime went up, dereliction of duty went up, that idea that "I"m an individual" changed to the detriment of the military service. No on will know for sure how many lives this might have put in jeopardy in combat, or on a ship, or on a flight line...but the anecdotal information is that this hurt rather than harmed the military service and eroded many of the strict standards.

...and that is why felons, and those with just a GED are no longer qualified for military service.

 

I love this example for one reason. Patterns of human behavior. The criminals were unprofessional before the military. They were breaking laws before the military and continued this human behavior in the military. It was a poor choice to let them in. This is different for homosexuals that have been following the military laws, rules and regulations before the DADT repeal. They will in most cases continue this same human behavior of being professional and following the rules, laws and regulation.

There are homosexuals at west point that had some of the highest grades there. You can't honestly tell me that if they were found to be gay under DADT and kicked out that that would be fair. They worked hard to get there just like any straight people.

I really think this is partly a generation issue. When the military was surveyed, most of the ones in my generation had little problems with it. They had a positive view of homosexuals in many cases.

 

Ymra and pettyofficer...

One of the most famous, feared, and praised military states in history was Sparta. Those men were fierce warriors, and they were feared throughout the ancient world.

You know what else?

Homosexual relationships were encouraged among the men of Sparta. In fact, it was more or less mandated. It was believed that if you loved the man fighting next to you, you would fight that much harder. Of course you would- you don't want to see your lover killed, right? Furthermore, by limiting access to women and children, a man-soldier would've been more likely to reserve his allegiance and sense of responsibility for the state.

Also, by law they were required to marry, as the state required children and more boy-soldiers to continue this stringent military. There was punishment for not following the rules. Many men, of course, were uncomfortable about marrying a woman because they sometimes had jealous lovers to contend with.

AND...young Spartan brides had their hair clipped and were dressed as men for the wedding (and subsequent wedding night). They would be left on a mattress in the dark for the bridegroom to find where he would come and have his way with her, and then leave to return to sleep in the barracks with the men.

Now, not that I'm saying that every military should operate this way...but certainly, homosexuals in the military didn't hurt Sparta, considering their fierce reputation. And I am just as certain that openly gay men and women in the military won't hurt anything either.

 

If there were a difference between sexuality and behavior I'd have no issue either. But for many there isn't. And many gays feel as if they have to "act" gay emulate women in some gross display of femininity.

As long as them or any other person can shoot, move, and communicate and present themselves as professional warrior. I don't have a problem.

but I WILL have a problem with a flamboyant flamer, or a gay warrior that believes that she should be able to wear the female uniform because he was "born a man but really is a woman" or a female soldier that feels because she is a "stud" she should be allowed to serve infantry, or wear the male uniform.

Homosexually is almost sick in this country. We bastardize everything...

...religion
... politics
...and ahh yes, even homosexuality.

I am saying it simply does not stop at sexuality, and anyone who believes it does isn't paying attention.

 

I disagree that what African-Americans went through can in any way be compared to homosexuality.

And I said the fight was more compared with women had nothing to do with me believe that homosexual were a different species...

huh?

What I mean to say is the fight women went through for equality and being able to, for example, serve as commanders and being able to serve in forward units is more comparable to homosexuals than there fight. I'm not sure where you got the "different species" idea from, and perhaps that is part and parcel of the problem.

I AM AN AMERICAN WARRIOR.

...I am coming as this from a truly informed perspective. Many of you think all that need be done is "Ahhh just let them serve" There are other things that need be worked out. Sleeping arrangements, women do not sleep with the males.

Shower arrangements, women do not shower with males. And there are some women that wouldn't mind showering with males, there are some women that do mind and find this offensive and a violation of their right to certain exception of privacy. The same goes for some males when showering, sleeping, living with an openly gay Soldier.

...and that is what I meant by the fight for women being more closely related to than African-Americans.

 

None of what you're saying holds any inkling of credibility. Homosexuals are basically men and women who simply have a near exclusive sexual attraction towards someone of the same sex. They are not a different species altogether as gay men shower with heterosexual men and lesbians shower with women who are straight.

There won't be a need of a change in that department. By your logic, then blacks should have their own sleeping quarters and showers because of the lack of comfort with the next person because of their sexual orientation.

Furthermore, there have been gay men and women in high profile positions. The only difference is their sexual orientation and many soldiers who have such leaders all admired them because of their merit in the battlefield and display of leadership. Seems as though you're making any old piss-poor excuse to hide the fact you're simply insecure and uncomfortable with the idea.

Again, you haven't presented credible insight.

 

I'm just thankful that people are even willing to fight and potentially risk their lives for this country, regardless of sexuality.

 

Exactly.

 

I wanted to know what those in the military thought about it.
This is what a hard ass military man told me when I asked him his thoughts on it.

My opinion on the issue concurs with his statement highlighted in bold font.

 

good thread.....


My thoughts on DADT. I really don't care who sleeps with who, but what I do care about is good order and discipline and the presentation of a warrior.

And this will take some getting used too.



Can the Soldier/Sailor/Airman/Marine meet the standards of a warrior?

If the answer is yes?

We can all fight together.



...and do you know the problem I have with this picture?

THE MARINE'S FUCKING HAIRCUT....damn the hugging.

 

Yo, it isn't even the haircut, though if it bothers you from a professional perspective, so be it. For me it's simply the idea that two people in uniform would show affection for each other in that way romantically. Would that even happen if it were a male and female in a relationship in the military? I'm not in the services but I would think such PDA wouldn't fly either way while in uniform.