What a sad, truly sad statement about our homophobic way of thinking!

[Sihouette]

Do the eaters of the dead, do it in public and insist that others watch them?~ little acorn

..lol...good point.

I assume we're talking about the twin to gay marriage, "DADT"?

As soon as DADT becomes mainstream via the US government, marriage cannot be denied. It will be a federal issue of precident. Hope everyone realizes this..

Showering and cohabitating in the same barracks with people who consider you a "sexual candidate" [someone of a type they prefer to have sex with] has been forbidden before now. Once gays may openly shower and dress with heteros, then opposite gender heteros must be able to shower and sleep and dress together. Anything less would be descrimination. Are we to assume a lesbian GI would be more able to control herself in those situations than a male hetero GI? Why?

Just a few things to kick around.

 

[Revere]

DADT has nothing to do with gay marriage.

Segregation and slavery were Federal issues of precedent, too.

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

..lol...good point.

I assume we're talking about the twin to gay marriage, "DADT"?

As soon as DADT becomes mainstream via the US government, marriage cannot be denied. It will be a federal issue of precident. Hope everyone realizes this..

Showering and cohabitating in the same barracks with people who consider you a "sexual candidate" [someone of a type they prefer to have sex with] has been forbidden before now. Once gays may openly shower and dress with heteros, then opposite gender heteros must be able to shower and sleep and dress together. Anything less would be descrimination. Are we to assume a lesbian GI would be more able to control herself in those situations than a male hetero GI? Why?

Just a few things to kick around.

Sorry, Siho, this isn't about gay marriage...it's about overturning the DADT rule {return to your topic about Prop.#8 if you want to discuss gay marriage}
And there have been gay/lesbians in our military for centuries...just because 'YOU' couldn't see them/define what exactly that they look like/act like...{they don't glow in the dark} doesn't mean that they weren't right there beside your ancestors while they trained/sweated/showered/ate/slept...

 

[Revere]

Sorry, Siho, this isn't about gay marriage...it's about overturning the DADT rule {return to your topic about Prop.#8 if you want to discuss gay marriage}
And there have been gay/lesbians in our military for centuries...just because 'YOU' couldn't see them/define what exactly that they look like/act like...{they don't glow in the dark} doesn't mean that they weren't right there beside your ancestors while they trained/sweated/showered/ate/slept...

You served in the military with homosexuals?

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

You served in the military with homosexuals?

Nope, would have but bad knees kept me out of the NAVY. Both of my brothers/uncles/my father and my grandfathers all knew of the 'ODD FELLOWS' but that wasn't something that the group talked about out in the open...well not until my brothers era in the late 60's - 70's.

 

[Sihouette]

Both of my brothers/uncles/my father and my grandfathers all knew of the 'ODD FELLOWS' but that wasn't something that the group talked about out in the open..

Bingo!

Because if they were legitimized in the open, recruitment of the far-vaster pool of heteros would predictably drop. "Here you go son, sign right here at the "x". Of course you know this means you'll be showering with Jackson over there who will be eyeing your whanger every minute you look away. You'll get over it though."

Everyone knows that homosexuals are out there, they just don't want them advertising. In other words we want the homosexual behaviors in the closet because behind closed doors is exactly where those activities belong.

Sex isn't love. Time to wake up and realize that.

 

[Revere]

Nope, would have but bad knees kept me out of the NAVY. Both of my brothers/uncles/my father and my grandfathers all knew of the 'ODD FELLOWS' but that wasn't something that the group talked about out in the open...well not until my brothers era in the late 60's - 70's.

And that hurt unit cohesiveness how?

 

[Revere]

Is this for the benefit of the miltary, or for the benefit of homosexuals?

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

And that hurt unit cohesiveness how?

Where exactly did I state that it would...GOOD GRIEF, do you always twist everything into something that it isn't?

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

Bingo!

Because if they were legitimized in the open, recruitment of the far-vaster pool of heteros would predictably drop. "Here you go son, sign right here at the "x". Of course you know this means you'll be showering with Jackson over there who will be eyeing your whanger every minute you look away. You'll get over it though."

Everyone knows that homosexuals are out there, they just don't want them advertising. In other words we want the homosexual behaviors in the closet because behind closed doors is exactly where those activities belong.

Sex isn't love. Time to wake up and realize that.

And laying ones life on the line for your freedom makes the 'LUST FACTOR'...what exactly?

You seem to have the heightened sense of homophobic that just soars into the atmosphere. I do believe that the physical exhaustion/daily routine/openness of the shower areas would be prohibitive of someone becoming aroused by another's gender...but you seem fixated by those...hmmmm thoughts and I doubt your limited knowledge of this topic!
SEX CERTAINLY ISN'T LOVE but are you suggesting that LOVE IS ONLY FOR HETROSEXUALS?

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

Clipped from this article:
http://www.slate.com/id/2243421?wpisrc=newsletter
And this is assuming Congress actually passes the law repealing the policy. Which may be the trickiest part. Neither chamber has taken up a bill that would lead to repeal. But there are two main options on the table. One is to attach the repeal to the annual defense appropriations bill, which comes up for a vote in the spring. That would give skittish members of Congress an excuse to support it—we were just voting to fund the military, we swear!—while putting its opponents into the awkward position of voting against money for troops. Another option is to pass a stand-alone bill. Sen. Joe Lieberman was considered an early candidate to lead that crusade in the Senate, but Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand has lately taken up the torch. In the House, a bill sponsored by Rep. Patrick Murphy already has 183 cosponsors. This option might be faster, but it risks making members of Congress who vote for repeal more vulnerable. (Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin is on the record as being dubious.)
That's not to mention potentially massive roadblocks if Congress doesn't like the results of Gates's study. The odds of the study concluding that gays in the military hurt unit cohesion are next to nil, because, well, no study ever has. Even the 1993 study the military commissioned from the RAND Corp. concluded that "the presence of known homosexuals on the force is not likely to undermine military performance." But that didn't prevent opponents of gays in the military from demagoguing the issue. If the new study reveals even a shred of doubt that gays serving openly could affect their ability to win in battle, Congress will flee. As Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., put it, the primary purpose of the military is "not to promote civil rights or individual justice, but to prevail in combat."

**********************************
Now that made me LMAO

 

[always]

Powell backs Mullen, Gates on DADT

Posted: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:45 AM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Andrea Mitchell

From NBC's Andrea Mitchell
Colin Powell has just issued a statement supporting Joint Chiefs Chairman Mullen's and Defense Secretary Gates' effort to review -- and likely repeal -- the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy toward gays in the military.
Of course, it was Powell -- as Joint Chiefs chairman -- who persuaded the Clinton White House to adopt the DADT policy 17 years ago, because of Powell's opposition to gays in the military.
Powell's statement:

In the almost seventeen years since the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" legislation was passed, attitudes and circumstances have changed. The principal issue has always been the effectiveness of the Armed Forces and order and discipline in the ranks. I strongly believe that this is a judgment to be made by the current military leadership and the Commander in Chief. It is also a judgment Congress must make. For the past two years, I have expressed the view that it was time for the law to be reviewed by Congress. I fully support the new approach presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee this week by Secretary of Defense Gates and Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I will be closely following future hearings, the views of the Service Chiefs and the implementation work being done by the Department of Defense.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/02/03/2193041.aspx

********************************
John McCain flip/flopped back against and now Colin Powell comes out for the repeal of DADT...good grief, if we would all just STOP PLAYING MORALITY MONITORS and mind our own business...my what a wonderful world this could be {now strike up the Disney music and dance around the talking trees}...​

​

Having colon pile speaking against DADT makes me believe DADT is very necessary for the security of our armed forces and thus Americas' future!!
Why is it necessary for anyone to know or pass public judgement on anothers sex habits? Unless there actions are violation of law or endangers a life other than their own they should be able to live their life, without government interfence or economic support from taxpayers!

 

[citizenzen]

Why is it necessary for anyone to know or pass public judgement on anothers sex habits?

I don't know what sex you are... but I think I love you... at least for that opinion.

 

[Revere]

Where exactly did I state that it would...GOOD GRIEF, do you always twist everything into something that it isn't?

Why does the military not allow heterosexual women and heterosexual women to shower and change in front of each other?

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

Why does the military not allow heterosexual women and heterosexual women to shower and change in front of each other?

You may want to reread that and see if it makes any sense to you and if not that's fine...but I won't be trying to provide you with an answer...LMAO