DADT Ready for Passage

[Kathianne]

Looks like Republicans have halted DREAM, but DADT looks like a done deal:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gays_in_military;_ylt=AgMvYj0AsyN9MyJlTJxWRYOMw fIE;_ylu=X3oDMTFiZjh1aDV2BHBvcwMxBHNlYwN5bl9icmVha 2luZ19uZXdzBHNsawNicmVha2luZ25ld3M-



Senate advances bill to lift military gay ban
AP

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Anne Flaherty, Associated Press – 4 mins ago

WASHINGTON – In a landmark vote for gay rights, the Senate on Saturday voted to advance legislation that would overturn the military ban on openly gay troops known as "don't ask, don't tell."

The 63-33 test vote all but guarantees the legislation will pass the Senate, possibly by day's end, and reach the president's desk before the new year...

[jimnyc]

Congrats, queers!!

[Kathianne]

Congrats, queers!!

I just don't see the necessity of this other than pc. Gays have always served. They've always received the awards and promotions due them. No, they couldn't talk about their sex lives, anymore than straights do. So now those that want to do so, can boast about it. Just like the straights that do the same, they'll be ostracized and bitching about how it's because they are gay.

[darin]

Prepare for 30% added to Defense spending - barracks, shower facilities, etc...court martial...homosexuals have vastly-higher rates of domestic violence, STDs, etc..treating victims of the violence, both physically and psychologically, as well as the added strain to the military health system will cost billions.

[fj1200]

but DADT looks like a done deal

Good, Republicans shouldn't have gotten in front of this one.

[jimnyc]

Good, Republicans shouldn't have gotten in front of this one.

Do you think the men will be allowed to wear their ass-less chaps, tutu's, make-up or all the other cool stuff they like to wear in parades and in bars when they go out on weekends?

What if they're in an "official" parade and not something like a gay pride parade - do you think they'll write something into the military code forbidding them from dressing like they do in "other" parades? I mean, after all, they are born this way and can't help themselves.

A man with a lot of headaches or flat feet can be excused from the military but now it's ok to have societies abnormal dancing amongst our troops.

Flat feet - yer out!
Too many headaches - yer out!

Enjoy your "fellow weiners" - come on in!!

[fj1200]

^Patriotism and service to country should not be denied to those willing. Hopefully the code of conduct will be enforced equally to all.

[jimnyc]

^Patriotism and service to country should not be denied to those willing. Hopefully the code of conduct will be enforced equally to all.

Patriotism and desire to serve should not be the sole factor in determining whether or not someone is "fit" to serve in our military.

I'm sure there are thousands of patriotic criminals in jail that would love to serve.

What about the entire "lgbt" group. How do you think the soldiers will feel when a woman is next to them with a penis, or a man with a vagina? You do realize that this community is 100% in support of transgendered as well, no? Do you think these freaks should serve alongside our men as well, just because they are patriotic and want to serve? What do you say when one of these "hermaphrodites" sues the government because they allow plain 'ol regular queers but not transgendered freaks?

Like DMP wrote above - wait until the costs start coming into play. Then next will be more complaints about discrimination and then more lawsuits.

My last thought, which I know has "nothing" to do with this...

When I think of a a soldier, a navy seal or a marine gunny sergeant - well, let's just say I don't picture queers. IMO, the whole image just changed.

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/townhall/car/b/tmdsu10121620101217010217.jpg

[Psychoblues]

Service by open homosexuals will be the law of the land on Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2010 as I understand. This is many years too late but I'll accept it late or not. Asking them to lie or deny who they are is criminal in and of itself. And discrimination against them is simple hate in it's manifestation.

I can't wait to see what they do with the new rainbow camo battle dress, and I hear they do wonders with barracks decor!!!!!!!!!!!!

Psychoblues

[jon_forward]

Only psyhco would make light of this sad situation our Military services are faced with because of this. As Jim has stated let one group in and you will have to let em all in. I would not have used the word freaks but it fits very well. Do you suppose all of the new recruits let into the military under this dubious policy can be put into special units, let em wear their rainbow colors, easier for the enemy to see. this policy is wrong wrong wrong .

[jimnyc]

Only psyhco would make light of this sad situation our Military services are faced with because of this. As Jim has stated let one group in and you will have to let em all in. I would not have used the word freaks but it fits very well. Do you suppose all of the new recruits let into the military under this dubious policy can be put into special units, let em wear their rainbow colors, easier for the enemy to see. this policy is wrong wrong wrong .

And now a handful of queers who fought this policy are being referred to as "heroes". I'm sorry, speaking up during your military time, or after, or seeking the repeal of this law - none of that makes these queers heroes.

[Psychoblues]

Only psyhco would make light of this sad situation our Military services are faced with because of this. As Jim has stated let one group in and you will have to let em all in. I would not have used the word freaks but it fits very well. Do you suppose all of the new recruits let into the military under this dubious policy can be put into special units, let em wear their rainbow colors, easier for the enemy to see. this policy is wrong wrong wrong .

This is not a sad situation for our military. This is probably the BEST day for the military since President Harry Truman and Allied Commander General Dwight D. Eisenhower racially integrated the armed forces in 1948. It is, however, a sign for the homophobes to get help. My lighter comment was meant more of a mocking of them than anything else.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

This is not a sad situation for our military. This is probably the BEST day for the military since President Harry Truman and Allied Commander General Dwight D. Eisenhower racially integrated the armed forces in 1948. It is, however, a sign for the homophobes to get help. My lighter comment was meant more of a mocking of them than anything else.

Psychoblues

It is sad PB. The liberal media is now attcking them as they wave the pom poms for the gays





On Monday night's All Things Considered newscast, National Public Radio sent reporters to three different military bases looking for reaction to the repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell." Art Silverman came last at the Marine Base in Quantico, Virginia:

SILVERMAN: Then I march into Number Two Military barbershop and find only one customer to ask about the repeal. How will this affect people in the field doing their job?

Turn off the recorder, he says. He wants to talk frankly. He wants me to know that most Marines come from parts of the country where tolerance toward homosexuality doesn't exist. This means problems ahead. He says, "These are country boys, and they even have problems accepting blacks and women in the Corps." For him, repeal of “don't ask, don't tell” means hostility and harassment ahead for Marines who let people know they are gay or lesbian.

That must have been just what NPR was looking for -- matching their anti-bumpkin agenda.


Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2010/12/21/nprs-quantico-qualms-marine-corps-full-country-boys-who-are-racist-sexis#ixzz18nMX4t00






With the liberal media, it is a RIGHT to be in the military

[Missileman]

Do you think the men will be allowed to wear their ass-less chaps, tutu's, make-up or all the other cool stuff they like to wear in parades and in bars when they go out on weekends?

What if they're in an "official" parade and not something like a gay pride parade - do you think they'll write something into the military code forbidding them from dressing like they do in "other" parades? I mean, after all, they are born this way and can't help themselves.

A man with a lot of headaches or flat feet can be excused from the military but now it's ok to have societies abnormal dancing amongst our troops.

Flat feet - yer out!
Too many headaches - yer out!

Enjoy your "fellow weiners" - come on in!!

That's right Jim...it's a well known fact that the military allows hetero people who are into S&M to wear their leather and chains and carry those cool whips in official military formations. One can only wonder what the gays will be allowed to. [/sarcasm]

Some of you are capable of the most asinine mental machinations.

[Missileman]

Patriotism and desire to serve should not be the sole factor in determining whether or not someone is "fit" to serve in our military.

I'm sure there are thousands of patriotic criminals in jail that would love to serve.

What about the entire "lgbt" group. How do you think the soldiers will feel when a woman is next to them with a penis, or a man with a vagina? You do realize that this community is 100% in support of transgendered as well, no? Do you think these freaks should serve alongside our men as well, just because they are patriotic and want to serve? What do you say when one of these "hermaphrodites" sues the government because they allow plain 'ol regular queers but not transgendered freaks?

Like DMP wrote above - wait until the costs start coming into play. Then next will be more complaints about discrimination and then more lawsuits.

My last thought, which I know has "nothing" to do with this...

When I think of a a soldier, a navy seal or a marine gunny sergeant - well, let's just say I don't picture queers. IMO, the whole image just changed.

I DARE you to mouth off to a gay SEAL.

[jimnyc]

I DARE you to mouth off to a gay SEAL.

I DARE you to find a gay Navy Seal.

And I am willing to voice my viewpoint on political issues to anyone or everyone. Someone's size or capabilities aren't suddenly going to change my opinion.

Furthermore, what gave you the notion that I wanted to mouth off to anyone? The post you quoted was about transgendered things. Find me a transgendered Seal while you're at it.

[Missileman]

I DARE you to find a gay Navy Seal.

And I am willing to voice my viewpoint on political issues to anyone or everyone. Someone's size or capabilities aren't suddenly going to change my opinion.

Furthermore, what gave you the notion that I wanted to mouth off to anyone? The post you quoted was about transgendered things. Find me a transgendered Seal while you're at it.

The post I quoted included:

When I think of a a soldier, a navy seal or a marine gunny sergeant - well, let's just say I don't picture queers. IMO, the whole image just changed.

I don't give a shit if it's a chick with a dick or a guy with a gash, if it's been thru SEAL training it'd likely be able to kick the shit outta ya despite any image issues you might find.

[jimnyc]

The post I quoted included:


I don't give a shit if it's a chick with a dick or a guy with a gash, if it's been thru SEAL training it'd likely be able to kick the shit outta ya despite any image issues you might find.

Well, forgive me if I don't tremble in fear. I have a better chance of my balls spontaneously falling off than running into a transgendered Seal.

[jon_forward]

our nation will be protected by gltb , the problem I see is who else is going to be there besides them. My guess is NOBODY!!!!! Would i work with one of these ahhh .... beings yes been there done that. I have friends that are Gay, open, and the life of the party. Im I going into battle with them, OH HELL NO , This is my Fox hole you find your own. Friendly fire problems are sure to follow.

[DragonStryk72]

Okay, there were already gay and lesbians serving in the military. I even knew some back in my Navy days. there were gays and lesbians in the military prior to the DADT, hell, I'm pretty willing to bet there have been gays in the military as long as militaries have existed. Nothing's changed, they just stopped trying to tiptoe around it.

If soldiers are so freaked about by gays that it prevents them from doing their jobs, then that isn't the gay person's fault. Seriously, I don't know of any Marine, Army, Navy, or Air Force person who had any problem finishing their job just because a gay person was present.

[Trigg]

I doubt the flamers have ever even thought about joining the military.

I have no problem with letting gays join. If they want to defend their country good for them.

[Psychoblues]

I doubt the flamers have ever even thought about joining the military.

I have no problem with letting gays join. If they want to defend their country good for them.

Don't be so certain about the flamboyants, Trigg. The military has always attracted those that seek to push the envelope, if you know what I mean. But, I do appreciate your seemingly change of heart on this subject. I think you'll find more peace with yourself and a better acceptance from fellow human beings. Not that you have any problems now but only in the case of the queers. They are really not such a bad bunch. Other than being a bit bitchy every now and then, I think they will work out well in the ranks.

And jimnyc is dead wrong on his assumptions about special forces not being homosexual. I knew one little 120 pound dyke that would beat his ass down in less than a minute if she thought for a second he was hitting on some girl she had targeted.

:laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Trigg]

Don't be so certain about the flamboyants, Trigg. The military has always attracted those that seek to push the envelope, if you know what I mean. But, I do appreciate your seemingly change of heart on this subject. I think you'll find more peace with yourself and a better acceptance from fellow human beings. Not that you have any problems now but only in the case of the queers. They are really not such a bad bunch. Other than being a bit bitchy every now and then, I think they will work out well in the ranks.

Psychoblues

It's not a change of heart psycho, I couldn't care less if gays want to serve in the military. As long as they follow the rules on sexual harrassement like everyone else than as far as I'm concerned they're welcome to fight for this country.

[jimnyc]

And jimnyc is dead wrong on his assumptions about special forces not being homosexual.

I said TRANSGENDERED if you actually read what I wrote. And even if you want to go with just "homosexual" - I can't imagine many special forces (Navy Seals is what we mentioned specifically) being gay and especially not transgendered. But 'd be happy to change my position or re-word it if people want to show me the plethora of queers and/or transgendered in our special forces groups.

[DragonStryk72]

I said TRANSGENDERED if you actually read what I wrote. And even if you want to go with just "homosexual" - I can't imagine many special forces (Navy Seals is what we mentioned specifically) being gay and especially not transgendered. But 'd be happy to change my position or re-word it if people want to show me the plethora of queers and/or transgendered in our special forces groups.

Well, there's my friend Daniel, he's gay, has been for quite some time, so we'll start there. As I posted earlier, they exist, and have existed for quite a long time. Just like there are gay priests out there.

[jimnyc]

Well, there's my friend Daniel, he's gay, has been for quite some time, so we'll start there. As I posted earlier, they exist, and have existed for quite a long time. Just like there are gay priests out there.

One non-verifiable person doesn't do much to sway my opinion. But anyway, again, if you go back through my posts you'll see what I'm speaking of is whether or not the acceptance of "gays" in the military will lead to discrimination if "transgendered" people are not allowed in. They've opened the gates for the LBGT group and they have always called for equality for ALL their members - and that counts transgendered.

Do all of you who are FOR homosexuals in the military also think it would be OK to allow transgendered? Do you REALLY think we have many and/or any transgendered in our Navy Seal teams or other special forces groups?

I disagree with the homosexuals in the military, that's just my opinion. But I would disagree 3000000% more to transgendered being allowed in the military.

And if you're in charge in the military - how do you tell the LBGT group that you'll stop discriminating against one group but not the other?

[Thunderknuckles]

I don't have a problem with gays in the military for the most part. The only part about it I question is housing, showering, etc. The military clearly separated men and women for obvious reasons. Not so with gay folks. But then again, housing them separately would just make things worse for gays and then there's then question of how the hell do you house them separately without someone nailing you as a segregationist in the first place?

[Psychoblues]

I have never seen any official suggestion for separate housing or showers for the queers, Tks. There are those that would drag that red herring around though.

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

It's not a change of heart psycho, I couldn't care less if gays want to serve in the military. As long as they follow the rules on sexual harrassement like everyone else than as far as I'm concerned they're welcome to fight for this country.

Everyone is expected to follow the rules in the military, Trigg. But there are subtle lessons taught even in basic training to lie, cheat and steal to achieve certain objectives. Some people have a problem knowing when to shut all that off.

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

I said TRANSGENDERED if you actually read what I wrote. And even if you want to go with just "homosexual" - I can't imagine many special forces (Navy Seals is what we mentioned specifically) being gay and especially not transgendered. But 'd be happy to change my position or re-word it if people want to show me the plethora of queers and/or transgendered in our special forces groups.

I am not certain the current legislation covers surgically obtained sex changed individuals serving in the military. There are thousands of surgeries that disqualify one for military service and sex change may be one of them. I have heard no mention of the service of transgendered individuals except from the homophobic fearmongering crowd. I think it's a red herring. Nice try though, jimbo!!!!

There will be no plethora of queers or transgendered any more than are currently serving right now either, IMHO. And they are serving right now and in considerable numbers. Homo's tend to like a dangerous lifestyle. And I think I posted several years ago about the biggest, baddest, meanest and toughest man I ever met was a Sergeant Major from the 82nd Airborne and he was also queer as a 3 dollar bill!!!!! He was about as tough as that 120 pound dyke I talked about earlier. She was also in the 82nd.

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

There will be no plethora of queers or transgendered any more than are currently serving right now either, IMHO. And they are serving right now and in considerable numbers. Homo's tend to like a dangerous lifestyle. And I think I posted several years ago about the biggest, baddest, meanest and toughest man I ever met was a Sergeant Major from the 82nd Airborne and he was also queer as a 3 dollar bill!!!!! He was about as tough as that 120 pound dyke I talked about earlier. She was also in the 82nd.

Give me some reliable proof of even ONE transgendered in our entire military. Just one, Psycho. We'll move to special forces one we recognize how many transgendered are actually in the military already...

[logroller]

Well, there's my friend Daniel, he's gay, has been for quite some time, so we'll start there. As I posted earlier, they exist, and have existed for quite a long time. Just like there are gay priests out there.

Gay priests you say -- that explains the ripped physique of Jesus on the cross!:laugh:

[logroller]

I don't have a problem with gays in the military for the most part. The only part about it I question is housing, showering, etc. The military clearly separated men and women for obvious reasons. Not so with gay folks. But then again, housing them separately would just make things worse for gays and then there's then question of how the hell do you house them separately without someone nailing you as a segregationist in the first place?

Integrity and character aren't determined through sexual activity, gay straight or otherwise, and fraternization has always been frowned upon, punished in many cases; so I don't see how sexual preference makes much of difference. The military has never been a hotbed for moral fortitude; they're trained to kill in service to their country and protect their fellow soldier; not some providence for morals and beliefs. I believe those with upstanding moral character must make a judgment before entering the military as to what degree their lifestyle, not mere sexuality, is afflicted by the nature of military action.

On the positive side; going on leave just got a nice bonus: gays make the best wingmen.

[Psychoblues]

Give me some reliable proof of even ONE transgendered in our entire military. Just one, Psycho. We'll move to special forces one we recognize how many transgendered are actually in the military already...

Damn, jim, why are you being so hard headed? I told you what I think about the transgendered folk but this conversation is not really about them. Even YOU have mentioned "congrats queers", "the queers", "gay pride parades", etc. right here in this thread. Overall, I don't accept your NOW argument that your comments were more aimed towards the transgendered bunch. I continue to maintain this legislation does not apply to them and that they could not qualify for service via medical considerations anyway. You're scared to death of the queers and anyone that has ever read much of what you have written about them knows that. Oh, except those that are equally afraid of them. Yall make excuses for each other. You're just wrong in your thinking, jim, and this bipartisan legislation bears that out. And as a veteran that has served alongside queers for years I can tell you that you have nothing to worry about. They're not going to make you ride a root or anything like that.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

<iframe src="http://videos.mediaite.com/embed/player/?layout=&playlist_cid=&media_type=video&content=DLHMNH068HXQ6V74&read_more=1&widget_type_cid=svp" width="420" height="421" frameborder="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true"></iframe>

[Thunderknuckles]

Integrity and character aren't determined through sexual activity, gay straight or otherwise, and fraternization has always been frowned upon, punished in many cases; so I don't see how sexual preference makes much of difference. The military has never been a hotbed for moral fortitude; they're trained to kill in service to their country and protect their fellow soldier; not some providence for morals and beliefs. I believe those with upstanding moral character must make a judgment before entering the military as to what degree their lifestyle, not mere sexuality, is afflicted by the nature of military action.

On the positive side; going on leave just got a nice bonus: gays make the best wingmen.
Playing devil's advocate here:
The military separates males and females despite integrity and character. Why not separate gay males/females from their counterparts under the same logic?

[Psychoblues]

Playing devil's advocate here:
The military separates males and females despite integrity and character. Why not separate gay males/females from their counterparts under the same logic?

I can't speak for all branches but the Air Force has co ed barracks and facilities all over the place. This ain't gonna be very hard to do. Why make it harder than it needs to be? Integrity and character be damned on these issues, Tks.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

Playing devil's advocate here:
The military separates males and females despite integrity and character. Why not separate gay males/females from their counterparts under the same logic?

That would be discrmination - at least according to Barney frank

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hd6U8z6UaG" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hd6U8z6UaG" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[Thunderknuckles]

I can't speak for all branches but the Air Force has co ed barracks and facilities all over the place. This ain't gonna be very hard to do. Why make it harder than it needs to be? Integrity and character be damned on these issues, Tks.

Psychoblues
Thanks for the reply Psycho.
How does the air force deal with privacy in regards to co-ed barracks?
Are women comfortable living in the same space as men? i.e. sharing the same facilities as men at the same time or do they designate different time shcedules.

This all stems from my own male perspective. That is to say if you put me in the same showers as women, I'm gonna be rubber neckin'. I'll be professional about it, but I'll do it just the same lol.

Maybe I'm not cut out for today's military :)

[Psychoblues]

Thanks for the reply Psycho.
How does the air force deal with privacy in regards to co-ed barracks?
Are women comfortable living in the same space as men? i.e. sharing the same facilities as men at the same time or do they designate different time shcedules.

This all stems from my own male perspective. That is to say if you put me in the same showers as women, I'm gonna be rubber neckin'. I'll be professional about it, but I'll do it just the same lol.

Maybe I'm not cut out for today's military :)

It's odd at first but you get used to it, Tks. People generally don't step on each others toes just by nature but for those that do it all seems to work out anyway. Please don't think that I meant to imply that co ed was everywhere in the Air Force but I lived with it in several places and didn't have a problem with it and I don't believe the females did either. If I'm not mistaken the females had a choice to live co ed or separated. I don't have a clue as to how many chose to segregate by gender or even gender preference. I guarantee you there was some of that going on as well but that opens up a whole new can of worms, doesn't it?

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

Damn, jim, why are you being so hard headed? I told you what I think about the transgendered folk but this conversation is not really about them.

What I was discussing was about them, and even YOU stated they had transgendered in the military currently:


There will be no plethora of queers or transgendered any more than are currently serving right now either, IMHO. And they are serving right now and in considerable numbers.

All I did was ask you to backup your own statement. I doubt there is a single transgendered in the entire military. But the LBGT group who has fought for the repeal of DADT amongst other objectives - wants "equality for all" specifically speaking for the 4 groups they represent. All I asked is how many can call for non-discriminatory practices in the military and then turn around and exclude a group from the very same group you just appeased.


Even YOU have mentioned "congrats queers", "the queers", "gay pride parades", etc. right here in this thread. Overall, I don't accept your NOW argument that your comments were more aimed towards the transgendered bunch.

No offense, David, but I don't need you to accept my opinions. I sarcastically congratulated the queers, then Darin pointed out possible negative effects of the repeal, and then I added what could be a further contentious issue. The LBGT group thinks ALL of their "members" are just like you and I. I'm sorry, a half man half woman, or one who decided to change who he/she was - is NOT the same as me and no amount of debating will put transgendered on the same plateau as ANYONE.


I continue to maintain this legislation does not apply to them and that they could not qualify for service via medical considerations anyway.

I don't think it applies to them either - but it was YOU who I already quoted saying they already serve in our military. But we both know that is nonsense. And since this repeal doesn't apply to them - don't you think they'll feel slighted by still being discriminated against while their peers get "accepted". And if "they can shoot straight, are patriotic & willing to defend this country" - shouldn't they have a chance? I mean, that seemed to be the argument for allowing gays to serve.


You're scared to death of the queers and anyone that has ever read much of what you have written about them knows that. Oh, except those that are equally afraid of them. Yall make excuses for each other. You're just wrong in your thinking, jim, and this bipartisan legislation bears that out. And as a veteran that has served alongside queers for years I can tell you that you have nothing to worry about. They're not going to make you ride a root or anything like that.

Repeating over and over that people have a "fear" of queers will not make it so.

Anyway, Merry Christmas ya 'ol Bastard!! :coffee:

[Psychoblues]

What I was discussing was about them, and even YOU stated they had transgendered in the military currently:



All I did was ask you to backup your own statement. I doubt there is a single transgendered in the entire military. But the LBGT group who has fought for the repeal of DADT amongst other objectives - wants "equality for all" specifically speaking for the 4 groups they represent. All I asked is how many can call for non-discriminatory practices in the military and then turn around and exclude a group from the very same group you just appeased.



No offense, David, but I don't need you to accept my opinions. I sarcastically congratulated the queers, then Darin pointed out possible negative effects of the repeal, and then I added what could be a further contentious issue. The LBGT group thinks ALL of their "members" are just like you and I. I'm sorry, a half man half woman, or one who decided to change who he/she was - is NOT the same as me and no amount of debating will put transgendered on the same plateau as ANYONE.



I don't think it applies to them either - but it was YOU who I already quoted saying they already serve in our military. But we both know that is nonsense. And since this repeal doesn't apply to them - don't you think they'll feel slighted by still being discriminated against while their peers get "accepted". And if "they can shoot straight, are patriotic & willing to defend this country" - shouldn't they have a chance? I mean, that seemed to be the argument for allowing gays to serve.



Repeating over and over that people have a "fear" of queers will not make it so.

Anyway, Merry Christmas ya 'ol Bastard!! :coffee:

Jim, this thread is not about transgendered, the legislation is not about transgendered, YOU began whining about transgendered in post #8 but you continue to whine about the queers and blame it on the transgendered. I made a misstatement and included transgendered in a general suggestion that the queers that are already serving and in considerable numbers but any reading of that statement coupled with other statements by me in this thread would clearly reflect my thoughts on transgendered in the military.

Repeating over and over that you aren't afraid of the queers when it's plain as the nose on your face doesn't dispel your fear either, ya ol' coot!!!!! Where does all that hate and resentment come from? Oh, and all that crap from dmp is just that, crap. I note he didn't offer up any links to all that crap and fearmongering.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!!!!!!!!!!!

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

Jim, this thread is not about transgendered, the legislation is not about transgendered, YOU began whining about transgendered in post #8 but you continue to whine about the queers and blame it on the transgendered. I made a misstatement and included transgendered in a general suggestion that the queers that are already serving and in considerable numbers but any reading of that statement coupled with other statements by me in this thread would clearly reflect my thoughts on transgendered in the military.

Repeating over and over that you aren't afraid of the queers when it's plain as the nose on your face doesn't dispel your fear either, ya ol' coot!!!!! Where does all that hate and resentment come from? Oh, and all that crap from dmp is just that, crap. I note he didn't offer up any links to all that crap and fearmongering.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!!!!!!!!!!!

Psychoblues

You mean the King of making statements and NEVER supplying backup links is actually asking someone to supply a link? LOL Don't even go there, PB. If there is any one person on this board who has made statements and NEVER supplied links, it is YOU.

Anyway, are you going to finally answer my question or not? How are YOU going to respond when the LBGT group starts clamoring about rights for the transgendered? How do you think the military will respond if this organization does for the trannies what it has done for others represented in their group - which is to have equality for ALL of them?

Funny how you guys SCREAM for equality for all for years now, but can't seem to come around enough to even discuss trannies! You're not going to discriminate against other human beings and state that trannies and the like don't deserve equal treatment, are you? If they can shoot straight, are patriotic, and are willing to die for their country - WHY couldn't trannies be given the same rights as queers?

[Psychoblues]

You mean the King of making statements and NEVER supplying backup links is actually asking someone to supply a link? LOL Don't even go there, PB. If there is any one person on this board who has made statements and NEVER supplied links, it is YOU.

Anyway, are you going to finally answer my question or not? How are YOU going to respond when the LBGT group starts clamoring about rights for the transgendered? How do you think the military will respond if this organization does for the trannies what it has done for others represented in their group - which is to have equality for ALL of them?

Funny how you guys SCREAM for equality for all for years now, but can't seem to come around enough to even discuss trannies! You're not going to discriminate against other human beings and state that trannies and the like don't deserve equal treatment, are you? If they can shoot straight, are patriotic, and are willing to die for their country - WHY couldn't trannies be given the same rights as queers?

What the fuck are you talking about, jim. When I am quoting from an article, a news piece or anything that can be linked I ALWAYS link to it. To not do so would not be prudent. I see no reason or ability to link to my opinions and observations. In the case of the statements by dmp I have never seen one iota of credible information verifying any concern that he may have. It's bullshit fearmongering but I did not respond to him or that. I am responding to YOU.

The legislation addresses the DADT aspect of a long and wrong held requirement for our troops to lie and hide. I don't believe the trannies can qualify for military service from a medical standpoint but I don't care if they do. I have not and am not now making any attempt to avoid that useless conversation. The bisexual side is probably more prevalent than is known as well. I could tell you a few stories about lonely sergeants and their horny wives at the NCO clubs.

Think about what you are demanding, jim. We may indeed have a few trannies and I know we have a whole bunch of queers, lesbos and freaks. So far they've been told to keep their heads down or get out. We just don't know much about the glbt military community but I suspect we will be finding out in the next few years if not almost immediately.

Think what you want, jim. They are what they are and they are HERE. Any inability to deal with that is a fault of your own and certainly no fault of the glbt crowd. Like I've told you before, jim, they ain't gonna make you ride a root or anything like that.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!!!!!!!!!!! btw, did you see my post in Pro Sports about Riverside? Take a look. I'm serious about it.

Psychoblues

[Trigg]

Having never been in the military and not having a problem with gays serving.......my two cents.

I'm sure everyone already knew/suspected who was gay and who wasn't.

I don't think gays will rush to join just because they can now do it openly.

But, if a person has to take showers with person who is now openly gay and that person makes a comment or obviouly starts "checking people out". That, my friends, is sexual harrassement and it opens the military up for lawsuits if they don't take the charges seriously.

[KarlMarx]

The repeal of the passage of DADT should put to rest any notion that gays are an oppressed minority deserving of protection. They are a politically active and savvy group that have an agenda and will do what it takes to make it reality. They have a lot of political power and politicians are willing to contort themselves into pretzels to get their vote.

But, the gays will milk the notion of the oppressed gay person to the hilt. They have the public hoodwinked into being afraid of being labeled "homophobe" as much as the blacks had us being afraid of being labeled "racist".

My problem with the repeal of DADT is that it won't be the last thing that gays will demand.

Gays have been yammering about this one and gay marriage for over 10 years. Once gays win the privilege to marry they will demanding something else.

My guess is that the next thing will be affirmative action for gays. Perhaps for the more radical gays it will be the lowering of the age of consent or its abolition entirely.

I wonder how the gay supporters on this board will feel if they lose their jobs because their employers have to hire more gays... or if they lose a promotion to a gay person simply because they're straight.

Don't worry, it isn't over yet.

Thirty years ago, the public would never have entertained the notion that granting homosexuals the right to marry was good for society. Now, it seems, that gays may be getting that soon.

I have to ask what those of us who live long enough will see in thirty years... the abolition of pedophilia laws? Polygamy? The legalization of prostitution and child prostitution? I have to wonder where this all will lead.

[Psychoblues]

My guess is that the next thing will be

My guess is that everything you wrote about DADT and gays and prejudice and oppressed minorities, etc. is your guess and nothing more.

What's all this hate, fearmongering and resentment about? It is really sad that people have died to protect the freedoms of people like you.

Happy Christmas and Merry New Year!!!!!!

Psychoblues