"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" To repeal or not to repeal...

[Familyguy1]

Military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy Blocked in Senate

So? What are yalls opinions on this?

Personally, I do not see a problem with it, it seems to me the majority of people wanting to keep this policy are of the mind that every single gay person is out to get them, which is absurd.

Its quite sad to see that people have to hide their own personal identity/beliefs to be able to fight for the liberties that we hold dear.

Every single argument that I have heard from people that want to keep this in place are the arguments that are completely stereotypical and does not apply to the majority of homosexuals.

Discuss..

 

[mpw]

Seems odd to ask a person to be willing to fight and die for your freedom, but then limit his freedom.

 

[smacky]

Let them decide if they want to keep quiet about it or tell everyone. Don't make a law on requiring to do one or the other.

 

[Crude]

There's a deeper reason for then just sexuality.

 

[Familyguy1]

There's a deeper reason for then just sexuality.

Care to elaborate?

 

[smacky]

Give them the right to enlist and soon they'll want to decorate the interior of tanks and design the uniforms.

 

[Crude]

Care to elaborate?

Rational thought my friend. Start with a life or death situation involving you and others with varying degrees of interpersonal relationships, ranging from casual to intimate.

Also, assume that don't ask don't tell is repealed, do you want all gay squads or mixed. You do understand that both present very difficult challenges that are likely not solvable?

I think the policy gives everyone the ability to serve and rightly avoid conflicts within the squads.

I guess my question out of ignorance is: Do men and women serve on the same infantry squads?

 

[batgeek]

women can not serve in the infrantry in the US Army.

 

[SamsungVibrant]

I'm sorry, but anyone who is for "Don't ask don't tell" or who is against gays in the military, or gay rights in general needs to just wake up and smell the coffee. It is 2010, it is time for equality for all, and time extend equal rights to everyone, including Gays and Lesbians. The right to love should not be dictated by me, you, or the government.

These gay guys in the military are not flaming hair dressers that walk with a little sugar in their step. Many of these guys probably are in the closet, are macho, typical guys. You would never think twice. Additionally, many of these guys will probably never even come out of the closet, however the issue is if they are ever found out they shouldn't lose their job. Hopefully as a society we can come to a place where no gay person has to live in fear, or live in the closet. No person that is different should be ridiculed, harassed, belittled, emotionally or physically assaulted.

For those of you who think gay guys are all girly, and lesbians are butch woman in man suits, then you are watching too much TV. I guarantee some of you have cousins, brothers, sisters, relatives, idols, icons, football stars, boyfriends, even some of you woman reading this forum some of you have husbands that are gay, yet they live in the closet, and you would never suspect a thing, because they don't carry themselves in a feminine manner, on the outside appearance they are totally just a typical male, but they are suppressing their true love for the same sex.

I say yes to gays in the military, I also voted NO on 8, which means yes on gay marriage.


For those who will continue to insist that the military will turn into one gay orgy, get a life, really, get a life.

 

[batgeek]

my only concern:

currently men and women are berthed separately. understandable. if gays were allowed to serve openly, where would they be berthed? would they have their own quarters? if so, they would be berthed with they same people are sexually attracted to.

as a straight male do not wish to be berthed with gay men? should i be allowed to berth with straight females?

 

[SamsungVibrant]

my only concern:

currently men and women are berthed separately. understandable. if gays were allowed to serve openly, where would they be berthed? would they have their own quarters? if so, they would be berthed with they same people are sexually attracted to.

as a straight male do not wish to be berthed with gay men? should i be allowed to berth with straight females?

Didn't I say that those who will continue to insist that the military will turn into one big gay orgy need to get a life. Right after I say that, first comment "if gays were allowed to serve openly, where would they be berthed?" My goodness.

Stick them all together, gay, straight, bi, all together. You are afraid they are going to rape you? Gayness will rub off? Maybe Friday nights will turn into gay orgy night?

What are you afraid of? Maybe one will jump you in your sleep and slap his dick against your face, you might end up liking it and put it in your mouth? I don't understand your point. If you aren't gay, then you don't have to worry. Gay people and straight people co-exist everyday without problems, until someone makes it an issue.

By the way, you mentioned you are a straight male and you wouldn't want to berth with gay men in the military. I bet you wouldn't even join the military, you would probably flee to canada in a draft, or you would be the first to cry "i'm gay i'm gay I can't join." While the gays and lesbians are protecting our country and protecting your rights and freedoms, you deny theirs, and you sit there with the freedom of free speech using your android device to argue who should berth with whom.

Here is a better question. Where should all the closed minded discriminatory idiots berth? Should we let them berth amongst everyone else, should closed minded idiots have a right to berth with level headed people? That is my only concern.

 

[batgeek]

ummm i served 8 year in the USN.

you do understand there is a purpose for separating via sex currently? right? do you think that is going to change once gays are allowed to serve openly? i highly doubt it.

i have no problems with gays serving openly in the military. but if equal is going to be equal, i would like to be berthed with people i am sexually attracted to also. if not, then i am the one that will be discriminated against.

you sure do jump to alot of conclusions that are WRONG. you take the emotional side of the arguement, with obligatory character attacks, not the factual/logical. you can not have a decent discussion with the likes of you.

i'm done responding to you.

 

[SamsungVibrant]

ummm i served 8 year in the USN.

you do understand there is a purpose for separating via sex currently? right? do you think that is going to change once gays are allowed to serve openly? i highly doubt it.

i have no problems with gays serving openly in the military. but if equal is going to be equal, i would like to be berthed with people i am sexually attracted to also. if not, then i am the one that will be discriminated against.

you sure do jump to alot of conclusions that are WRONG. you take the emotional side of the arguement, not the factual/logical. you can not have a decent discussion with the likes of you.

NO, because you are comparing the right to be openly gay in the military to your right to berth with people you are sexually attracted to. That makes no sense, I don't even want to entertain your poor argument.

Oh boo hoo, gay's are berthing with me, and I can't berth with woman, I'm going to sue now. Why you think that is anyway similar to denying an entire group of people equal rights blows my mind.

 

[batgeek]

Oh more emotion and failing to see the logic. Just as I stated. Congrats.

 

[copestag]

IMO if you arent currently serving...... or planning to serve in the future....... then its none of your business period....... either way...... for or against...... you have zero stake

its not a question of homosexuals being able to perform the same jobs...... they are already doing them silently now......

the only question open for debate is how will being open effect the way straight members perceive them..... this isnt a question you or I can answer...... nor can any politician........ but ultimately its the only question that matters in the entire debate..... and it can only be answered on an individual basis...... how will each straight soldier percieve the change

will allowing members to be openly gay effect the straight members ability to perform their duties properly....... will a soldier fight beside a gay soldier in a foxhole and not have any problem

if this isnt going to cause a problem for straight soldiers then there should be no reason to force homosexuals to stay in the closet......... if its going to cause a problem then guess what......you cant force every straight person to like gays...... and you cant have a military without straight people...... there just arent enough gays to fill the ranks

personally Ive been out of the military for many years....... so I could care less what the sexual orientation of soldiers are...... as long as they can do their jobs without unnecessary distraction then I feel safe

so like I said..... its really a question for the troops to decide IMO...... the military is a brotherhood...... and if allowing gays to come out of the closet will harm that brotherhood then it puts everyones life at risk....... if the majority of troops have no problem with it...... then who am I to say otherwise

 

[mpw]

...i have no problems with gays serving openly in the military. but if equal is going to be equal, i would like to be berthed with people i am sexually attracted to also. if not, then i am the one that will be discriminated against...

What I don't think makes sense about your argument is that currently it would appear you're happy to be berthed with homosexuals 'that are sexually attract to you' secretly. How is that more equal than an honest relationship? and for those homophobes in the military that don't like the idea of homosexuals bunking with them; how is it better to spend years bunking beside somebody only to find out one day that they're homosexual, rather than be aware from day one? Surely finding out that somebody's homosexual the night before a dangerous op. is detrimental, whereas being open and honest allows the unit to adjust(if even necessary) during less stressful times?

 

[batgeek]

no where did i say i was concerned that they may be attracted to me.

we are talking about everything be fair. it isn't that hard to follow the logic of the arguement. i've pretty much outlined it all. if need be, i can draw up a flowchart if it isn't understandable.

so like I said..... its really a question for the troops to decide IMO...... the military is a brotherhood...... and if allowing gays to come out of the closet will harm that brotherhood then it puts everyones life at risk....... if the majority of troops have no problem with it...... then who am I to say otherwise

‘Don’t ask’ survey published - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times

 

[mpw]

no where did i say i was concerned that they may be attracted to me...

Fair enough, you were saying that if homosexuals were aloud to serve honestly in the military you said you wanted equality, by allowing you to berth with people you were attracted to. I still think this is a daft argument; berthing is currently appointed by sex, not sexuality, this would not change and is the same for all, and therefore equal.

 

[Frisco]

Seems odd to ask a person to be willing to fight and die for your freedom, but then limit his freedom.

^^^ This.

Most of these sorts of questions are still best answered by those targeted by the policy in question. To our shame there was a time when blacks had to be in all black units. If we would have asked them about mixing in with all units instead of segregated ones I'm sure the majority of them would have responded that they just wanted to do their job no matter what unit there were assigned to; same as gays.

"Don't ask don't tell" is just another way of saying there has to be something to hide.. the person can't just be their self (policies about behavior on base are already there, and they cover everybody).

 

[batgeek]

Fair enough, you were saying that if homosexuals were aloud to serve honestly in the military you said you wanted equality, by allowing you to berth with people you were attracted to. I still think this is a daft argument; berthing is currently appointed by sex, not sexuality, this would not change and is the same for all, and therefore equal.

ask yourself why they are appointed by sex.

 

[Frisco]

ask yourself why they are appointed by sex.

Heterosexual women are not analogous to gay men. It's such a common myth that it's all most people think of when attempting to support denial of across the board freedoms.

We'll see arguments such as, "why should gay men be allowed to shower in the same area as straight men if women can't?" etc.

It's an absurd analogy.

 

[batgeek]

then why is there a problem?

 

[mpw]

ask yourself why they are appointed by sex.

I have; my argument still stands, and I still think yours is just naive.

 

[batgeek]

then why haven't men and women been berthed together from the start?

 

[Familyguy1]

then why haven't men and women been berthed together from the start?

Rape, sexual assault, thats why.