http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...itary_gays&e=5
i was floored when i learned about this. there is not a single ounce of logic behind it in my opinion.
what do you guys think? agree? disagree? discuss please.
Printable View
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...itary_gays&e=5
i was floored when i learned about this. there is not a single ounce of logic behind it in my opinion.
what do you guys think? agree? disagree? discuss please.
Yay for freedom and equality:rolleyes2
[qq]"Don't ask, don't tell" allows gays to serve in the military as long as they keep their sexual orientation private and do not engage in homosexual acts.[/qq]I knew that this kind of discrimination was a prescribed part of military life... but I didn't know it was quite as bad as that. Surely that's illegal... but then, some institutions take a very long time to change.[qq]Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness, a conservative advocacy group that opposes gays serving in the military, said the loss of gays and lesbians serving in specialized areas is irrelevant because they never should have been in those jobs in the first place. [/qq]I would love to know how she figures that out.[qq]"We need to defend the law, and the law says that homosexuality is incompatible with military service," [/qq]Uh huh....:rolleyes: [qq]"There is no shortage of people in the military, and we do not need people who identify themselves as homosexual."
[/qq]Yeah, I can just imagine it - World War Three has started, and America's forces are fighting on the front lines. One soldier turns to his buddies, just before a major charge, and says, "by the way, I'm gay". Clearly, such terrible acts would assure America's loss in any conflict. It makes so much sense.
Curiously, but predictably, that absurd policy seems to ignore bisexuals, as usual.
I wonder, what is the basis for prohibiting homosexual military personnel?
Spread of disease? No, both sexes serve in the military so STD risk is no valid excuse to bar homsexuals.
"Effeminate" men make poor leaders/fighters? Again, the presence of women undermines that argument. There are effeminate heterosexual men, and feminine women who have similar attitudes. There are also "macho", aggressive gay men and women. Sexuality is no determinant of personality. I don't think this argument could be run successfully, either.
Oh well, at least this blatantly flawed discrimination policy gives potential recruits an easy way out:
*Telephone rings*
"Hello?"
"Hello, this is Sergeant Bill O'Slaughter from the 14th Mobile Division. You want to earn some pride and fight for your country, sir?"
"No thanks, I prefer men."
Draft-dodging has never been easier.
I agree with everything you've said, D. The only excuse I can think of is keeping homosexuals out, or at least silent about their orientation, is for their safety in combat situations. Not that I agree with it, but I thought back to what my dad told me.
We were talking about inaccuracies in Vietnam War movies. He said there werent a lot of mixed-race units, in fact during his two and one half tours, he had only one black man in his unit. The reason is that giving a gun to a bunch of potentially racist men and then sending them into a combat situation where it's easy to shoot someone you hate and blame it on enemy fire isnt a good idea.
Now, its not the smartest thing, and it's definitly not the only reason, but it could be a factor and I thought I'd put my two cents in, because it was a reality during that time for blacks, and could be a reality during this time for gays.
Edit: And the gay thing doesnt usually work to get you out or keep you out. They'll blatantly ignore it, most of the time. I watched a kid go up to a drill sergeant, say he was gay... and the sgt. just laughed it off.
No one should reveal their sexual orientation within a public institution, period. I rather not know whether the people I'm serving with are straight, gay, bi or whatever. There's no point in knowing or asking. "Don't ask, don't tell" should be applied to everyone.
God, I love these touchy subjects. Just another chance to slip up and make a royal ass of myself.
Anyway, let's consider this situation. You're a young homosexual man or woman, fresh out of high school, and you decide you want to serve your country in the best way possible - you decide to enlist. You know about the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy. You report for basic training.
Now, here's the deal - from that point onwards, nobody at all is allowed to inquire about your sexual orientation. This is a form of protection to prevent leaders from making discriminatory decisions based on a servicemember's sexual orientation. It fits in with the next part of the policy.
The second part means that you cannot express in any way that you are homosexual. This is also intended to be protection for you. If you announce to your platoon that you're homosexual, how do you think they'd feel? I'm sure a lot of them would feel uncomfortable about it, and the less tolerant and more ignorant platoon-mates would probably beat the crap out of you at night. We don't want that happening to anyone, do we? The policy is an agreement that everyone willingly makes before entering the military.
So, as long as you don't tell anyone that you're homosexual, you can stay in the service. To aid in that, no one is allowed to ask you. To be honest, I don't see any reason to be open about your sexual orientation - I find doing so silly. Of course, I don't know anything about being homosexual - maybe there's something about it that makes you want to be open about it? Hell, I'm not even very open about my heterosexuality. I just do my job. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with my job, so why should I need to be open about it?
There was a guy in my squadron last year who was, beyond a shadow of doubt, gay. Everyone knew it, but no one asked him to be sure - and I don't think anyone even cared. He just graduated, and he's now a brand new 2nd Lieutenant in the Air Force. He's a great guy, and an even better leader - I'd follow him anywhere. Does his sexual orientation bother me? A bit, yes. Do I do my duty when he gives me a lawful order? Of course.
what you say, DocFrance, makes alot of sense but ignorance like this:
"Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness, a conservative advocacy group that opposes gays serving in the military, said the loss of gays and lesbians serving in specialized areas is irrelevant because they never should have been in those jobs in the first place. " continues to make me shake my head in disgust.
The same reason women don't serve along with the men, in combat units, or in boot camp. It creates tension... if all the guys have to take a shower together (yay), it would be a little awkward if one gets a boner. Besides, the entire idea of fighting, is doing so with as little emotion as possible... let's say you fancy one of your comrades - that could create some serious problems.Quote:
I wonder, what is the basis for prohibiting homosexual military personnel?
I know that here, gay men are allowed in the combat units, if they themselves don't have a problem with it. Most do, however. So, not too many homsexuals in any combat unit, so far.
arent you in israel?? i thought everyone was required to be in the military in israel.
Yes, mostly everyone, unless you're an Arab or an orthodox Jew. Gay men also join the army, just not the combat units. That's all.Quote:
arent you in israel?? i thought everyone was required to be in the military in israel.
The bit about creating tension is absolutely true, along with DocFrance's bit on night-time assaults. These are both bad things. I do have to agree with everyone who disagrees with that conservative group; Alexander the Great, conqueror of most of the known world, his elite squad of personal bodygaurds were, *GASP* ALL GAY! They were his fiercest, most skilled warriors, and each one of them loved sausage. Saying that someone isn't fit to be in military service just because they prefer their same sex has no legitimacy whatsoever.
I love Christianity's attempt at trying to take over the world. "Oh, this big, imaginary floating head in the sky from 2000 years ago says that that's bad. So obviously, the voice in my head is absolutely correct, and I must follow it's orders blindly."
Tangent: What if Lucifer really did kick God out of Heaven, and to keep us mere mortals from knowing the truth, he simply took up the mantle and only changed his policies around. Like, God used to be vengful and merciless, a slayer of Evil, then he turns into God, smoker of pot, bringer of love and peace to mankind, eater of munchies.
Please don't lump this all on Christians. There's plenty of aethiests who are homophobic/anti-homosexual as well, and plenty of religious types, myself included, that believe homosexuality is just as normal and beautiful as heterosexuality. Not to mention that the law that states that homosexuality is wrong is a law of Moses, not one of the Ten Commandments, and they havent been applicable since the death of Christ. It's just conviently ignored by the more closed-minded sorts. I dont insult what you do or don't believe in, don't insult how I feel about my God. Not all Christians are blind followers, and not all aethiests are... well, whatever random aethiest insult you choose.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wandering Zero
Well Bud, when you grow up in the Bible Belt, are forced to go to church and to a Christian school, you tend to lump them all together. Like how I still say, "Oh my God." I don't believe in God, or a higher power of any sort, it's a habit, and we're not talking about what a nun wears.
I can see where you'd take offense, but if you weren't so uptight about it, and would actually read what I said, I wasn't talking about Christians who actually think for themselves, I was talking about Christians who DO blindly follow whatever they think God is telling them to do. Oh my god, I didn't specify which exact type of Christian I was talking about, so fricken sue me. I happen to have plenty of Christian friends, so if I could help you to a tall glass of STFU, I'd be greatly appreciative if you'd take a drink ^_-
I actually did read all of what I said, and I'm not very uptight about it. All I said was doint lump as all together, which you clearly did in your statement. You didnt say 'some Christians', you just said 'Christians'.
I dont care what you do and dont believe in, it doesnt make one wit of a difference to me whether you're a Christian or an agnostic or a pie-worshiping crawdad. But dont insult my religion, and that's what that was. If you didnt mean it, that's fine, but just be clear about it next time. You lumped all together, and I dont appreciate that, and I dont think anyone of any group likes being lumped with the extremists, right?
And please don't tell me to 'stfu', it's rather childish.
[q=DocFrance]Anyway, let's consider this situation. You're a young homosexual man or woman, fresh out of high school, and you decide you want to serve your country in the best way possible - you decide to enlist. You know about the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy. You report for basic training.
Now, here's the deal - from that point onwards, nobody at all is allowed to inquire about your sexual orientation. This is a form of protection to prevent leaders from making discriminatory decisions based on a servicemember's sexual orientation. It fits in with the next part of the policy.
The second part means that you cannot express in any way that you are homosexual. This is also intended to be protection for you. If you announce to your platoon that you're homosexual, how do you think they'd feel? I'm sure a lot of them would feel uncomfortable about it, and the less tolerant and more ignorant platoon-mates would probably beat the crap out of you at night. We don't want that happening to anyone, do we? The policy is an agreement that everyone willingly makes before entering the military.
So, as long as you don't tell anyone that you're homosexual, you can stay in the service. To aid in that, no one is allowed to ask you. To be honest, I don't see any reason to be open about your sexual orientation - I find doing so silly. Of course, I don't know anything about being homosexual - maybe there's something about it that makes you want to be open about it? Hell, I'm not even very open about my heterosexuality. I just do my job. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with my job, so why should I need to be open about it?
There was a guy in my squadron last year who was, beyond a shadow of doubt, gay. Everyone knew it, but no one asked him to be sure - and I don't think anyone even cared. He just graduated, and he's now a brand new 2nd Lieutenant in the Air Force. He's a great guy, and an even better leader - I'd follow him anywhere. Does his sexual orientation bother me? A bit, yes. Do I do my duty when he gives me a lawful order? Of course.[/q]I completely understand what you're saying. However, if an officer were to say "Guess what, I'm totally straight!" then it's highly likely he'd not be booted out. "Don't ask, don't tell" only applies to homosexuals, hence the disagreement with it.
I can also understand what would happen if homsexuality were tolerated in the armed forces. Intolerance is rife throughout society, and the army can't afford a 24-hour watch to protect all minorities from abuse. However, instead of turning them away, wouldn't it be more proactive to work on changing workplace attitudes? It works in other employment situations; the military is of course a special case, but in time it should be possible to overcome outdated hostilities. After all, the armed forces have learned to tolerate women and ethnic minorites within their ranks and leadership, to a far greater extent than in the past.
The Wandering Zero, please watch what you say and don't attack other members personally for disagreeing with your comments.
Also, I'd like to give a general reminder to avoid inappropriate language, including derogatory words that could be offensive to some. Thank you.:)
I'm an atheist, so it doesn't make a lick of difference to me :pQuote:
Originally Posted by The Wandering Zero
Working on changing attitudes towards a certain group is easier said than done. Women have been admitted to the Air Force Academy for 28 years, and we still haven't hammered out all the bugs in that situation. But, yes, trying to make everyone else more tolerant is better in the long run than just trying to "hide" homosexuals behind the policy. The policy is just a short-term solution to a very touchy subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big D
yeah, let's not attack people because of their religion.
That's true. Maybe, given time, this policy will go the same way as the one I mentioned before. Maybe all it needs is time. This whole 'openly-gay' thing is very new to society. After all, we all cant be as cool an open minded as me. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by DocFrance
And thank you, D and nik.
This whole 'openly-gay' thing is very new to society. After all, we all cant be as cool an open minded as me.
yah man, i wish i were as cool as you
Ashley is the epitome of cool. We should all strive to follow in her footsteps.
I've lived around the US Army my whole life (my dad is US Mil) and I can tell you that with the rampant homophobia and conservatism in the military, this is not altogether surprising. Homosexuality makes most people in the military nervous, scared, and altogether hateful.
Still, there are plenty of gay people in the military. I've been hit on by them. :mad:
Well, what we have here is a bunch of men who have been trained to be tough, and not take no trout, as has been implemented into them by their superiors. If one or more is known to be gay, they're interpeted as a giver of trout, so to speak, so therefore they are not quite safe being around the other troops. I'm very liberal, and I think it'd be better if everyone just accepted each other, but I realise that is a pipe dream and it doesn't quite size up to human nature. (I'm probably being a little steriotypical here, but I'm trying not to be, really. I'm just delivering the simple facts.)
It's there for their protection. Being gay isn't like walking around with a sign on their back; it can very easily be covered up, just through their actions. They need to be careful, and just a little harder on the gay people, but I think it's better than completly excluding them from the military.