White House to address gays in military issue

[Scuba19]

People actually do have the right to serve in the military, at least without being subjected to illegal discrimination practices.

Discrimination due to physical or mental disability is illegal, but that occurs all the time in the military. People have the right to live, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not to serve in the military.

There really haven't been that many people in the military in this thread, especially not a lot that have been saying they don't want this. Furthermore, this isn't something that gets to be decided by the bigots in the military. It is nothing like telling a world-reknown doctor how to do surgery or how his medical beliefs are wrong. It's more like telling an average doctor that his discrimination against working with people because they are Jews is illogical and immature.

So now people in the military are bigots?

How is telling the military how to do their profession any different than telling a doctor how to do his profession?

[Scuba19]

You should try reading more than the opening line.




Who cares how they feel. They'll get over it.

Wow. He was comparing how most people in the UK military opposed gays in the military just like the majority of the US military opposes gays openly serving.

[markymark69]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/us...1military.html




This will be historic if this is changed. Bring it on. Anyone who's in the military and is going to cry about gay men being attracted to them doesn't belong in the military. You're the weak ones.

I have to disagree with you. The military, just like society, is diverse..even more so than when i was in the army back in the late 80's. You will always have some bigoted, narrow minded people, but in reality it doesnt or shouldnt affect the job they perform.

I work with a guy that cant stand all the foreign nationals we employ, but it doesnt prevent him from doing a good job. It makes him stupid IMO, but not weak.

[AKR]

Discrimination due to physical or mental disability is illegal, but that occurs all the time in the military. People have the right to live, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not to serve in the military.

Discrimination due to more than those things are illegal in the military and just because they happen doesn't mean other discrimination should be overlooked. The point is that the military is not simply free to discriminate as it chooses. It answers to the people.

So now people in the military are bigots?

If certain people in the military hate people because they are different, then, yes, that's a bigot.

How is telling the military how to do their profession any different than telling a doctor how to do his profession?

People in the military work for the country. Soldiers are not people who have a say in policy anymore than the voter. Furthermore, you made it sound as if everyone in the military is an expert at social relations and is not only more capable of making a choice on this matter but within their right. Not true.

[AKR]

I have to disagree with you. The military, just like society, is diverse..even more so than when i was in the army back in the late 80's. You will always have some bigoted, narrow minded people, but in reality it doesnt or shouldnt affect the job they perform.

I work with a guy that cant stand all the foreign nationals we employ, but it doesnt prevent him from doing a good job. It makes him stupid IMO, but not weak.

I think being afraid of someone for their sexual orientation and whining about it shows an incredibly weak state of mind.

[Scuba19]

I think being afraid of someone for their sexual orientation and whining about it shows an incredibly weak state of mind.

I'm not afraid of gay people, nor do I "whine" about it. I don't hate gays either (at least the non-flamboyant ones, the flamboyant ones are really annoying). What people do behind closed doors is none of my business. However, I don't want to publicly see homosexual acts anymore than I want to see a heterosexual couple with their tongues down their throats in public.

[thepointman]

I'm not afraid of gay people, nor do I "whine" about it. I don't hate gays either (at least the non-flamboyant ones, the flamboyant ones are really annoying). What people do behind closed doors is none of my business. However, I don't want to publicly see homosexual acts.

This is pretty much the same exact reasoning used behind apartheid. Good going.

[NeverStopMoving]

However, I don't want to publicly see homosexual acts anymore than I want to see a heterosexual couple with their tongues down their throats in public.

Yeah, people join the military so they can perform public displays of affection

You think the military is going to become one big gay makeout session?

Grow up.

[Scuba19]

Yeah, people join the military so they can perform public displays of affection

You think the military is going to become one big gay makeout session?

Grow up.

That whole post was not in regards to the military, but to civilian life.

Still, since heterosexual acts are permitted, if gays can serve openly, then homosexual acts will also have to be permitted (I am not talking about between people in the military, because that is not allowed).

[AKR]

I'm not afraid of gay people, nor do I "whine" about it. I don't hate gays either (at least the non-flamboyant ones, the flamboyant ones are really annoying). What people do behind closed doors is none of my business. However, I don't want to publicly see homosexual acts anymore than I want to see a heterosexual couple with their tongues down their throats in public.

What does any of this have to do with people in the military who wine about gays because they're afraid of them?

[spol8910]

That whole post was not in regards to the military, but to civilian life.

Still, since heterosexual acts are permitted, if gays can serve openly, then homosexual acts will also have to be permitted (I am not talking about between people in the military, because that is not allowed).

Where are heterosexual acts permitted in the military? You just stated that it can't occur between military members, so what are you trying to say?

[BTI]

Because that was the most horrendous comparison out of the three. If you want me to address the other two, I'd be glad to.

I believe that we should be free to do what we wish, so long as the safety and welfare of others is not compromised.

Animals, like children, cannot give proper consent. They aren't aware of the consequences in the same capacity that an adult human is. Two gay adults can give their consent. Max the dog cannot give his consent if Bobby Joe wants to fuck him.

Legally I don't have a problem with incestual relationships. I view such relationships very negatively, but I wouldn't want to stop two related individuals from forming a committed relationship. I don't feel that I have the right to do so.

The only issue there is with incestual relationships is that the children born from such relationships have a higher risk of developing genetic disorders. If there were no children involved, I'd have absolutely no problem with incest, but then again, we don't prevent dwarves, the disabled, and those with heritable diseases and other genetic disorders from having offspring.

I have a question. Why is it that whenever the anti-gay cannot form any rational argument for their position, they equate homosexuality to ****phila, bestiality, and incest?



First, I wasn't aware that incest was considered a mental disorder.

Homosexuality is not a disorder because it "implies no impairment in judgment, stability, reliability, or general social and vocational capabilities." (American Psychiatric Association)



Homosexuality shares as much in common with incest and ****philia as heterosexuality does.

Just because homosexuality is uncommon compared to heterosexuality doesn't make it any more related to ****philia.

Threesomes are an uncommon sexual practice. Does that make those involved in threesomes more inclined towards ****philia?

Bump for Dino.

All that is being said is that it is ridiculous for a psychologist to deem one abnormality a sexual preference, and another a disorder. Who has any right, and on what basis does one determine this...[/b]

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/
http://allpsych.com/disorders/dsm.html

According to the APA, homosexuality is not a disorder because it "implies no impairment in judgment, stability, reliability, or general social and vocational capabilities".

[Scuba19]

Where are heterosexual acts permitted in the military? You just stated that it can't occur between military members, so what are you trying to say?

Obviously, heterosexual acts are permitted between a military member and a non-military member. Therefore, if gays are allowed to openly serve, then homosexual acts must be also be permitted.

[Scuba19]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/us...1military.html

This will be historic if this is changed. Bring it on. Anyone who's in the military and is going to cry about gay men being attracted to them doesn't belong in the military. You're the weak ones.

I think being afraid of someone for their sexual orientation and whining about it shows an incredibly weak state of mind.

What does any of this have to do with people in the military who wine about gays because they're afraid of them?

Wow, look at this dude putting down men in the special forces who are a million times the man he could ever hope to be. Comical.

My post was in response to your second quote. Surely you can make the correlation (I hope). I highly doubt everyone who is against homosexual acts are afraid of gays.

[Equalizing]

homosexuality is a chemical/hormonal imbalance that happens at birth.

Please cite the valid, peer reviewed and published scientific litterature that you used to draw this conclusion.

[mntbikedude]

Wow, look at this dude putting down men in the special forces who are a million times the man he could ever hope to be. Comical.

My post was in response to your second quote. Surely you can make the correlation (I hope). I highly doubt everyone who is against homosexual acts are afraid of gays.

He is trying to help them to see how rediculous all their fears are. Most every other western nation has already come to this conclusion. AKR has a lot of guts defending this issue. Most people would back down the at the first suggestion that their support of this must mean they are gay.

[mntbikedude]

Obviously, heterosexual acts are permitted between a military member and a non-military member. Therefore, if gays are allowed to openly serve, then homosexual acts must be also be permitted.

There are sexual rules about having sex on base ect these would still apply. Who cares who someone has sex with or what they do as long as they are adults. I'm offended over old people sex, fat people sex but it is none of my business.

[Scuba19]

There are sexual rules about having sex on base ect these would still apply. Who cares who someone has sex with or what they do as long as they are adults. I'm offended over old people sex, fat people sex but it is none of my business.

Again, it is none of my business what two consenting adults do behind closed doors. It's just that I'd rather not publicly see homosexual acts.

[BTI]

Again, it is none of my business what two consenting adults do behind closed doors. It's just that I'd rather not publicly see homosexual acts.

Are you being forced to?

[viper30j]

Again, it is none of my business what two consenting adults do behind closed doors. It's just that I'd rather not publicly see homosexual acts.

Where are you even coming from with this stance? You obviously have something against homosexuals. You will no more see homosexual acts if gays were in the military, than you would see heterosexual acts. Oh so should women not be allowed in the military because it's offensive to some people that they kiss!??! There is no logical reason gays should not be allowed in the military. At all.

[HELIX35]

Blah, blah, blah.

About what I expected

[spol8910]

Wow, look at this dude putting down men in the special forces who are a million times the man he could ever hope to be.

After reading many of the immature, childish, and hateful responses on this site from members of the US military about gays serving openly I completely disagree with your statement "a million times the man he could ever hope to be". It takes guts to come out and live your life when tough macho str8 guys have the mindset that these people do. It really makes me loose a lot of respect for them.

[spol8910]

Obviously, heterosexual acts are permitted between a military member and a non-military member. Therefore, if gays are allowed to openly serve, then homosexual acts must be also be permitted.

True, but not on base. Homosexuals can already have their "acts" with each other. Right now it's ok as long as no one finds out. No one partakes in these "acts" in front of others.

[nutsy54]

And you have done absolutely nothing to provide a case for why gays should not serve in the military.

I wasn't trying to prove that, nor have I ever stated my position on either side of the discussion. Pay attention, and actually read the post before replying next time.

Your arrogance is astounding - especially considering you're happily making decisions that will have absolutely no impact on your own life, while completely ignoring input from people who have direct knowledge and experience on the subject being discussed.

[spol8910]

Your arrogance is astounding - especially considering you're happily making decisions that will have absolutely no impact on your own life

Careful there, that's one of the things that the religous right (part of who's fighting against gays in the military) love to do.

[ONtop888]

I've commented on this before, but since I'm not a soldier I decided to consult my three buddies who are Marines. All of them said they don't care, and that gays should be allowed in. They told me that they would rather have "a homo" side by side with them in combat, then a "straight dude" who will save his own ass, and jeopardize their lives.

Their position has become my position. I watched the senate hearing last year about the issue of gays in the military, and I honestly thought that the position against it was weak, and this was before I had a chat with my friends.

I'm a Christian, I have homosexual friends/family members, I strongly disagree with homosexuality, I don't hate gay people I love them as friends, family, and humans, thatisallfornow.jpg.

[Scuba19]

Where are you even coming from with this stance? You obviously have something against homosexuals. You will no more see homosexual acts if gays were in the military, than you would see heterosexual acts. Oh so should women not be allowed in the military because it's offensive to some people that they kiss!??! There is no logical reason gays should not be allowed in the military. At all.

To tell you the truth, I'm rather "on the fence" regarding the matter while leaning a tad bit to the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. Both sides do have some valid points. Most of my posts in this thread were just for exploratory purposes to see more arguments for the "allow gays" side.

After reading many of the immature, childish, and hateful responses on this site from members of the US military about gays serving openly I completely disagree with your statement "a million times the man he could ever hope to be". It takes guts to come out and live your life when tough macho str8 guys have the mindset that these people do. It really makes me loose a lot of respect for them.

I didn't say every person in the military is "a million time the man he could ever hope to be", but rather that those who are in the special forces are.

True, but not on base. Homosexuals can already have their "acts" with each other. Right now it's ok as long as no one finds out. No one partakes in these "acts" in front of others.

I was referring to the fact that since heterosexual kissing between a military member and a civilian are allowed, that if gays are allowed to openly serve then homosexual kissing will have to be allowed.

[spol8910]

I was referring to the fact that since heterosexual kissing between a military member and a civilian are allowed, that if gays are allowed to openly serve then homosexual kissing will have to be allowed.

Yes...things will have to be equal. Shudder......

[viper30j]

To tell you the truth, I'm rather "on the fence" regarding the matter while leaning a tad bit to the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. Both sides do have some valid points. Most of my posts in this thread were just for exploratory purposes to see more arguments for the "allow gays" side.

Haha okay. A lot of people just feel uncomfortable around gays. Especially if they are kissing or whatever. But that is not reason enough to not allow them in the military =\ That's absurd. It's not like it will turn into a giant sausage party if gays are allowed in. You may see a kiss once in a while.. but big deal.

[Das Gildenmeister]

I've commented on this before, but since I'm not a soldier I decided to consult my three buddies who are Marines. All of them said they don't care, and that gays should be allowed in. They told me that they would rather have "a homo" side by side with them in combat, then a "straight dude" who will save his own ass, and jeopardize their lives.

Their position has become my position. I watched the senate hearing last year about the issue of gays in the military, and I honestly thought that the position against it was weak, and this was before I had a chat with my friends.

I'm a Christian, I have homosexual friends/family members, I strongly disagree with homosexuality, I don't hate gay people I love them as friends, family, and humans, thatisallfornow.jpg.

no offense to u... but

that is quite possibly the dumbest thing i have read this year... and AKR makes alot of posts...

how does that even make sense?