|
Going off topic with the religious discussion from page 11 and onwards will net you a 2 day ban at least. Stay on topic pretty please, with minerals on top. |
On September 21 2011 08:13 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 07:50 ChampionZerg wrote:On September 21 2011 07:25 turdburgler wrote:On September 21 2011 07:23 ChampionZerg wrote:
I'm a former marine, and the reason for the DADT policy, is because it IS the best policy. What does your sexual orientation have to do with combat and comraderie between your platoon? Not a god damn thing is what, and having it be open causes drama that is unnecessary. Keep the shit to yourself, I knew several Staff NCO's that were on the supposed "down low" while i was in, did i still do what they told me to do? yes. Did i give a fuck that they were puffin peters on the weekend? NO, and its not something that should be able to be brought up in the work place or considered. Like said previously, its unnecessary and causes more drama in an already hectic environment. i think the point is more that you can talk about how much you would love to 'give her one' but you cant do the respective if you're gay. noone is saying they want sex to be part of being in the army. That's not the point at all, and who gives a fuck what you can talk about in the workplace anyways? It was actually punishable to talk about sexual relations of any kind at work, as well as just silly. With DADT, now commanders not only have to plan around the best execution of their mission(which should be the only thing on their minds), they now have to worry about silly trivial things such as whos gonna bunk with who. The bottomline, is your personal sexual preference has shit to do with the mission at hand, keep it to yourself. Now further down the line the military will have to worry about scenarios such as fake gay marriages for benefits, once benefits are allowed for same sex couples, and guess who will be paying for it? They shouldn't. If someone has a problem bunking with a homosexual, then they can GTFO out of the military. I'd rather kick out the homophobe than kick out the homosexual.
Agreed. Plus, the straight guys were bunking with the gay guys before anyway -.-' Repealing DADT doesn't turn your roommate gay.
And if you already knew about certain guys being gay and didn't out them beforehand... congratulations, now you don't have to worry about keeping secrets! It's just easier and fairer.
|
On September 21 2011 08:11 GogoKodo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:03 ChampionZerg wrote:
it is my concern, that more troops will opt to fake a gay marriage, i know it sounds crazy, but its a legitmate concern, i have served you havent. I know what dirtbags like to do when they get in, and thats find some way to get a free ride. Now John and Bill, can fake their marraige, have all the benefits, move out into town, all while actually having girlfriends and not having to worry about if their girlfriends leave them. It can and will happen. And no..thats not how we went after gays either while i was in, even if someone was blatantly in flames, nothing was said or mentioned, maybe amoungst eachother, but he was a brother to us just like any other. Noone would ever think about being a little troll and outing someone, thats a piss poor thing to do. Not to mention it would not be heavily pursued as noone really cared. That's fine for your case, but DADT has definitely been used to get people fired. So if you are all cool with it and don't actually make use of the rule then why does it need to be in place? You seem to keep saying that personal sexual stuff shouldn't come up at all as it effects the mission. Then how about a UDADT (Ultra Don't Ask Don't Tell). You talk about any heterosexual stuff you can get fired if someone brings it up to your superiors. Can't talk about your girlfriend, or wife, or anyone you find attractive, ever.
You're straw manning me with skewed logic and not truly interpreting what im writing. And sure thats fine with me, b/c i dont give a fuck what anyone finds attractive when im being rocket attacked in southern afghanistan. Thats the point im tryin to make. I was a sergeant, and i never dealt with someones girlfriend problems while im tryin to make sure we dont die. Its silly and childish, most of all irrelevant. If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion when youre being shot at for every day for 7 months straight, so while i value your opinion, your lack of experience causes me to stand by my opinion. Nothing can be introduced to take away the integrity of your platoon.
|
On September 21 2011 08:03 ChampionZerg wrote:
it is my concern, that more troops will opt to fake a gay marriage, i know it sounds crazy, but its a legitmate concern, i have served you havent. I know what dirtbags like to do when they get in, and thats find some way to get a free ride. Now John and Bill, can fake their marraige, have all the benefits, move out into town, all while actually having girlfriends and not having to worry about if their girlfriends leave them. It can and will happen. And no..thats not how we went after gays either while i was in, even if someone was blatantly in flames, nothing was said or mentioned, maybe amoungst eachother, but he was a brother to us just like any other. Noone would ever think about being a little troll and outing someone, thats a piss poor thing to do. Not to mention it would not be heavily pursued as noone really cared.
Except that people getting kicked out because of accidental outings happened quite often. It's easy to set up scarecrows and chase after red herrings.
|
If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion
So what's the problem, exactly? It's like you're appealing to the idea that most marines wouldn't accept a homosexual the same way as you supposedly would. If the military has to kowtow to the stupidity of the general soldier, then there's a greater issue at the basis of all this.
|
On September 21 2011 08:20 ChampionZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:11 GogoKodo wrote:On September 21 2011 08:03 ChampionZerg wrote:
it is my concern, that more troops will opt to fake a gay marriage, i know it sounds crazy, but its a legitmate concern, i have served you havent. I know what dirtbags like to do when they get in, and thats find some way to get a free ride. Now John and Bill, can fake their marraige, have all the benefits, move out into town, all while actually having girlfriends and not having to worry about if their girlfriends leave them. It can and will happen. And no..thats not how we went after gays either while i was in, even if someone was blatantly in flames, nothing was said or mentioned, maybe amoungst eachother, but he was a brother to us just like any other. Noone would ever think about being a little troll and outing someone, thats a piss poor thing to do. Not to mention it would not be heavily pursued as noone really cared. That's fine for your case, but DADT has definitely been used to get people fired. So if you are all cool with it and don't actually make use of the rule then why does it need to be in place? You seem to keep saying that personal sexual stuff shouldn't come up at all as it effects the mission. Then how about a UDADT (Ultra Don't Ask Don't Tell). You talk about any heterosexual stuff you can get fired if someone brings it up to your superiors. Can't talk about your girlfriend, or wife, or anyone you find attractive, ever. You're straw manning me with skewed logic and not truly interpreting what im writing. And sure thats fine with me, b/c i dont give a fuck what anyone finds attractive when im being rocket attacked in southern afghanistan. Thats the point im tryin to make. I was a sergeant, and i never dealt with someones girlfriend problems while im tryin to make sure we dont die. Its silly and childish, most of all irrelevant. If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion when youre being shot at for every day for 7 months straight, so while i value your opinion, your lack of experience causes me to stand by my opinion. Nothing can be introduced to take away the integrity of your platoon.
My god no one is talking about when you're in the heat of battle. It can happen ANYWHERE. Jesus Christ man. You keep bringing up these extreme situations where no one is even TRYING to insinuate relationship talk is appropriate, or someone is going off about their significant other. But rather, say you sent an e-mail home to your boyfriend that someone read over your shoulder. You can get kicked out for something like THAT.
I also don't really care about your personal experience in the military, as the military itself can, and will, change. I bet you a ton of white people felt unsafe when they had black units in their squad when there was first integration. I bet you they didn't trust each other as much. Guess what? We adapted.
|
On September 21 2011 08:24 koreasilver wrote:Show nested quote +If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion So what's the problem, exactly? It's like you're appealing to the idea that most marines wouldn't accept a homosexual the same way as you supposedly would. If the military has to kowtow to the stupidity of the general soldier, then there's a greater issue at the basis of all this.
Trust me when i say this, the corps is comprised of 80% fuckin tards. They will NOT be accepting of gays in a combat infantry platoon, their little insecure brains cant process it. Its hard enough to keep the fuckers from killing themselves on the weekend. I'm different b/c i realize ppl are different and have different backgrounds and are going to do as they please regardless, this is not the same for the most of the corps. This policy will be regretted in the coming years, mark my words.
|
On September 21 2011 08:20 ChampionZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:11 GogoKodo wrote:On September 21 2011 08:03 ChampionZerg wrote:
it is my concern, that more troops will opt to fake a gay marriage, i know it sounds crazy, but its a legitmate concern, i have served you havent. I know what dirtbags like to do when they get in, and thats find some way to get a free ride. Now John and Bill, can fake their marraige, have all the benefits, move out into town, all while actually having girlfriends and not having to worry about if their girlfriends leave them. It can and will happen. And no..thats not how we went after gays either while i was in, even if someone was blatantly in flames, nothing was said or mentioned, maybe amoungst eachother, but he was a brother to us just like any other. Noone would ever think about being a little troll and outing someone, thats a piss poor thing to do. Not to mention it would not be heavily pursued as noone really cared. That's fine for your case, but DADT has definitely been used to get people fired. So if you are all cool with it and don't actually make use of the rule then why does it need to be in place? You seem to keep saying that personal sexual stuff shouldn't come up at all as it effects the mission. Then how about a UDADT (Ultra Don't Ask Don't Tell). You talk about any heterosexual stuff you can get fired if someone brings it up to your superiors. Can't talk about your girlfriend, or wife, or anyone you find attractive, ever. You're straw manning me with skewed logic and not truly interpreting what im writing. And sure thats fine with me, b/c i dont give a fuck what anyone finds attractive when im being rocket attacked in southern afghanistan. Thats the point im tryin to make. I was a sergeant, and i never dealt with someones girlfriend problems while im tryin to make sure we dont die. Its silly and childish, most of all irrelevant. If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion when youre being shot at for every day for 7 months straight, so while i value your opinion, your lack of experience causes me to stand by my opinion. Nothing can be introduced to take away the integrity of your platoon.
If one of your marines is going out of his way to cause problems for another one of your marines (whether it's because of the latter's race, religion, sexual orientation, build, or anything else), I find it hard to swallow that you would rather end the problem with the bully in your platoon than end the problem with the other soldier who isn't going out of his way to cause problems.
Homophobes are the only ones causing problems with unit cohesion when it comes down to interacting with gays... not the gays themselves. Gay and lesbian soldiers simply want to serve in the military with the dignity and respect they deserve, which is the same level that straight soldiers automatically receive for being the majority. It's been accomplished with blacks. It's been accomplished with women. It's once again time to promote civil rights by integration. They deserve it as much as anyone else, and they shouldn't have to hide their identity.
|
On September 21 2011 08:27 ChampionZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:24 koreasilver wrote:If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion So what's the problem, exactly? It's like you're appealing to the idea that most marines wouldn't accept a homosexual the same way as you supposedly would. If the military has to kowtow to the stupidity of the general soldier, then there's a greater issue at the basis of all this. Trust me when i say this, the corps is comprised of 80% fuckin tards. They will NOT be accepting of gays in a combat infantry platoon, their little insecure brains cant process it. Its hard enough to keep the fuckers from killing themselves on the weekend. I'm different b/c i realize ppl are different and have different backgrounds and are going to do as they please regardless, this is not the same for the most of the corps. This policy will be regretted in the coming years, mark my words.
Because, you know, it's failed in every other country that's tried it. If it doesn't work for us because we have more stupid/ignorant/intolerant personnel than other countries, then maybe we should cut a lot of the stupid people out while simultaneously cutting out budget.
In fact, let's downsize military spending overall. Good idea  .
|
On September 21 2011 08:25 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:20 ChampionZerg wrote:On September 21 2011 08:11 GogoKodo wrote:On September 21 2011 08:03 ChampionZerg wrote:
it is my concern, that more troops will opt to fake a gay marriage, i know it sounds crazy, but its a legitmate concern, i have served you havent. I know what dirtbags like to do when they get in, and thats find some way to get a free ride. Now John and Bill, can fake their marraige, have all the benefits, move out into town, all while actually having girlfriends and not having to worry about if their girlfriends leave them. It can and will happen. And no..thats not how we went after gays either while i was in, even if someone was blatantly in flames, nothing was said or mentioned, maybe amoungst eachother, but he was a brother to us just like any other. Noone would ever think about being a little troll and outing someone, thats a piss poor thing to do. Not to mention it would not be heavily pursued as noone really cared. That's fine for your case, but DADT has definitely been used to get people fired. So if you are all cool with it and don't actually make use of the rule then why does it need to be in place? You seem to keep saying that personal sexual stuff shouldn't come up at all as it effects the mission. Then how about a UDADT (Ultra Don't Ask Don't Tell). You talk about any heterosexual stuff you can get fired if someone brings it up to your superiors. Can't talk about your girlfriend, or wife, or anyone you find attractive, ever. You're straw manning me with skewed logic and not truly interpreting what im writing. And sure thats fine with me, b/c i dont give a fuck what anyone finds attractive when im being rocket attacked in southern afghanistan. Thats the point im tryin to make. I was a sergeant, and i never dealt with someones girlfriend problems while im tryin to make sure we dont die. Its silly and childish, most of all irrelevant. If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion when youre being shot at for every day for 7 months straight, so while i value your opinion, your lack of experience causes me to stand by my opinion. Nothing can be introduced to take away the integrity of your platoon. My god no one is talking about when you're in the heat of battle. It can happen ANYWHERE. Jesus Christ man. You keep bringing up these extreme situations where no one is even TRYING to insinuate relationship talk is appropriate, or someone is going off about their significant other. But rather, say you sent an e-mail home to your boyfriend that someone read over your shoulder. You can get kicked out for something like THAT. I also don't really care about your personal experience in the military, as the military itself can, and will, change. I bet you a ton of white people felt unsafe when they had black units in their squad when there was first integration. I bet you they didn't trust each other as much. Guess what? We adapted.
ALL THAT MATTERS IS WHEN YOURE IN THE HEAT OF BATTLE! THAT'S WHAT IM TRYING TO GET YOU TO UNDERSTAND! YES IM TYPING IN CAPS!THE MILITARY IS NOT A PLACE TO MEET AND HANG OUT FOR FOUR YEARS! IT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU ARE TRAINED TO KILL THE ENEMY, NOT WORRY ABOUT JOHN AND BILLS WEEKENDS TOGETHER! DONT ASK DONT TELL DID EVERYTHING IT WAS SUPPOSED TO DO!
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On September 21 2011 08:29 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:27 ChampionZerg wrote:On September 21 2011 08:24 koreasilver wrote:If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion So what's the problem, exactly? It's like you're appealing to the idea that most marines wouldn't accept a homosexual the same way as you supposedly would. If the military has to kowtow to the stupidity of the general soldier, then there's a greater issue at the basis of all this. Trust me when i say this, the corps is comprised of 80% fuckin tards. They will NOT be accepting of gays in a combat infantry platoon, their little insecure brains cant process it. Its hard enough to keep the fuckers from killing themselves on the weekend. I'm different b/c i realize ppl are different and have different backgrounds and are going to do as they please regardless, this is not the same for the most of the corps. This policy will be regretted in the coming years, mark my words. Because, you know, it's failed in every other country that's tried it. If it doesn't work for us because we have more stupid/ignorant/intolerant personnel than other countries, then maybe we should cut a lot of the stupid people out while simultaneously cutting out budget. In fact, let's downsize military spending overall. Good idea .
yes i completely agree with downsizing the military and the full retirement benefits. I knew too many turds that had never deployed and even ducked deployments, retiring with full benefits.
|
If the American society, along with its military, can't learn to deal with something so basic and something that is such a non-problem, then America is just doomed to die. There are far more important military issues than being in a squad with a homosexual (of which there have been many for its entire historical existence).
|
On September 21 2011 08:30 ChampionZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:25 FabledIntegral wrote:On September 21 2011 08:20 ChampionZerg wrote:On September 21 2011 08:11 GogoKodo wrote:On September 21 2011 08:03 ChampionZerg wrote:
it is my concern, that more troops will opt to fake a gay marriage, i know it sounds crazy, but its a legitmate concern, i have served you havent. I know what dirtbags like to do when they get in, and thats find some way to get a free ride. Now John and Bill, can fake their marraige, have all the benefits, move out into town, all while actually having girlfriends and not having to worry about if their girlfriends leave them. It can and will happen. And no..thats not how we went after gays either while i was in, even if someone was blatantly in flames, nothing was said or mentioned, maybe amoungst eachother, but he was a brother to us just like any other. Noone would ever think about being a little troll and outing someone, thats a piss poor thing to do. Not to mention it would not be heavily pursued as noone really cared. That's fine for your case, but DADT has definitely been used to get people fired. So if you are all cool with it and don't actually make use of the rule then why does it need to be in place? You seem to keep saying that personal sexual stuff shouldn't come up at all as it effects the mission. Then how about a UDADT (Ultra Don't Ask Don't Tell). You talk about any heterosexual stuff you can get fired if someone brings it up to your superiors. Can't talk about your girlfriend, or wife, or anyone you find attractive, ever. You're straw manning me with skewed logic and not truly interpreting what im writing. And sure thats fine with me, b/c i dont give a fuck what anyone finds attractive when im being rocket attacked in southern afghanistan. Thats the point im tryin to make. I was a sergeant, and i never dealt with someones girlfriend problems while im tryin to make sure we dont die. Its silly and childish, most of all irrelevant. If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion when youre being shot at for every day for 7 months straight, so while i value your opinion, your lack of experience causes me to stand by my opinion. Nothing can be introduced to take away the integrity of your platoon. My god no one is talking about when you're in the heat of battle. It can happen ANYWHERE. Jesus Christ man. You keep bringing up these extreme situations where no one is even TRYING to insinuate relationship talk is appropriate, or someone is going off about their significant other. But rather, say you sent an e-mail home to your boyfriend that someone read over your shoulder. You can get kicked out for something like THAT. I also don't really care about your personal experience in the military, as the military itself can, and will, change. I bet you a ton of white people felt unsafe when they had black units in their squad when there was first integration. I bet you they didn't trust each other as much. Guess what? We adapted. ALL THAT MATTERS IS WHEN YOURE IN THE HEAT OF BATTLE! THAT'S WHAT IM TRYING TO GET YOU TO UNDERSTAND! YES IM TYPING IN CAPS!THE MILITARY IS NOT A PLACE TO MEET AND HANG OUT FOR FOUR YEARS! IT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU ARE TRAINED TO KILL THE ENEMY, NOT WORRY ABOUT JOHN AND BILLS WEEKENDS TOGETHER! DONT ASK DONT TELL DID EVERYTHING IT WAS SUPPOSED TO DO!
...That's really all you got out of the previous post? That gays are going to obsess over their boyfriends instead of focus on the mission?
That's like the tenth time you've misconstrued what we've been saying (or derailed the thread with your talks of fake gay marriages and other things).
And please don't type in all caps. We have bold and italics too Underline as well, for effect.
|
On September 21 2011 08:30 ChampionZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:25 FabledIntegral wrote:On September 21 2011 08:20 ChampionZerg wrote:On September 21 2011 08:11 GogoKodo wrote:On September 21 2011 08:03 ChampionZerg wrote:
it is my concern, that more troops will opt to fake a gay marriage, i know it sounds crazy, but its a legitmate concern, i have served you havent. I know what dirtbags like to do when they get in, and thats find some way to get a free ride. Now John and Bill, can fake their marraige, have all the benefits, move out into town, all while actually having girlfriends and not having to worry about if their girlfriends leave them. It can and will happen. And no..thats not how we went after gays either while i was in, even if someone was blatantly in flames, nothing was said or mentioned, maybe amoungst eachother, but he was a brother to us just like any other. Noone would ever think about being a little troll and outing someone, thats a piss poor thing to do. Not to mention it would not be heavily pursued as noone really cared. That's fine for your case, but DADT has definitely been used to get people fired. So if you are all cool with it and don't actually make use of the rule then why does it need to be in place? You seem to keep saying that personal sexual stuff shouldn't come up at all as it effects the mission. Then how about a UDADT (Ultra Don't Ask Don't Tell). You talk about any heterosexual stuff you can get fired if someone brings it up to your superiors. Can't talk about your girlfriend, or wife, or anyone you find attractive, ever. You're straw manning me with skewed logic and not truly interpreting what im writing. And sure thats fine with me, b/c i dont give a fuck what anyone finds attractive when im being rocket attacked in southern afghanistan. Thats the point im tryin to make. I was a sergeant, and i never dealt with someones girlfriend problems while im tryin to make sure we dont die. Its silly and childish, most of all irrelevant. If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion when youre being shot at for every day for 7 months straight, so while i value your opinion, your lack of experience causes me to stand by my opinion. Nothing can be introduced to take away the integrity of your platoon. My god no one is talking about when you're in the heat of battle. It can happen ANYWHERE. Jesus Christ man. You keep bringing up these extreme situations where no one is even TRYING to insinuate relationship talk is appropriate, or someone is going off about their significant other. But rather, say you sent an e-mail home to your boyfriend that someone read over your shoulder. You can get kicked out for something like THAT. I also don't really care about your personal experience in the military, as the military itself can, and will, change. I bet you a ton of white people felt unsafe when they had black units in their squad when there was first integration. I bet you they didn't trust each other as much. Guess what? We adapted. ALL THAT MATTERS IS WHEN YOURE IN THE HEAT OF BATTLE! THAT'S WHAT IM TRYING TO GET YOU TO UNDERSTAND! YES IM TYPING IN CAPS!THE MILITARY IS NOT A PLACE TO MEET AND HANG OUT FOR FOUR YEARS! IT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU ARE TRAINED TO KILL THE ENEMY, NOT WORRY ABOUT JOHN AND BILLS WEEKENDS TOGETHER! DONT ASK DONT TELL DID EVERYTHING IT WAS SUPPOSED TO DO!
You can't be serious. I would suggest re-reading some of the people's posts that you are arguing against after taking a few deep breaths.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
I was trying to find out how many people have actually been discharged from the military because of DADT and found this. There is stuff about the history of DADT there and according to their estimates over 14,000 people have been fired.
|
|
|
On September 21 2011 08:36 imallinson wrote:I was trying to find out how many people have actually been discharged from the military because of DADT and found this. There is stuff about the history of DADT there and according to their estimates over 14,000 people have been fired.
So, they obviously violated the policy right? Show me a case where the accused did not out himself, and ill stfu.
|
On September 21 2011 08:30 ChampionZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:25 FabledIntegral wrote:On September 21 2011 08:20 ChampionZerg wrote:On September 21 2011 08:11 GogoKodo wrote:On September 21 2011 08:03 ChampionZerg wrote:
it is my concern, that more troops will opt to fake a gay marriage, i know it sounds crazy, but its a legitmate concern, i have served you havent. I know what dirtbags like to do when they get in, and thats find some way to get a free ride. Now John and Bill, can fake their marraige, have all the benefits, move out into town, all while actually having girlfriends and not having to worry about if their girlfriends leave them. It can and will happen. And no..thats not how we went after gays either while i was in, even if someone was blatantly in flames, nothing was said or mentioned, maybe amoungst eachother, but he was a brother to us just like any other. Noone would ever think about being a little troll and outing someone, thats a piss poor thing to do. Not to mention it would not be heavily pursued as noone really cared. That's fine for your case, but DADT has definitely been used to get people fired. So if you are all cool with it and don't actually make use of the rule then why does it need to be in place? You seem to keep saying that personal sexual stuff shouldn't come up at all as it effects the mission. Then how about a UDADT (Ultra Don't Ask Don't Tell). You talk about any heterosexual stuff you can get fired if someone brings it up to your superiors. Can't talk about your girlfriend, or wife, or anyone you find attractive, ever. You're straw manning me with skewed logic and not truly interpreting what im writing. And sure thats fine with me, b/c i dont give a fuck what anyone finds attractive when im being rocket attacked in southern afghanistan. Thats the point im tryin to make. I was a sergeant, and i never dealt with someones girlfriend problems while im tryin to make sure we dont die. Its silly and childish, most of all irrelevant. If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion when youre being shot at for every day for 7 months straight, so while i value your opinion, your lack of experience causes me to stand by my opinion. Nothing can be introduced to take away the integrity of your platoon. My god no one is talking about when you're in the heat of battle. It can happen ANYWHERE. Jesus Christ man. You keep bringing up these extreme situations where no one is even TRYING to insinuate relationship talk is appropriate, or someone is going off about their significant other. But rather, say you sent an e-mail home to your boyfriend that someone read over your shoulder. You can get kicked out for something like THAT. I also don't really care about your personal experience in the military, as the military itself can, and will, change. I bet you a ton of white people felt unsafe when they had black units in their squad when there was first integration. I bet you they didn't trust each other as much. Guess what? We adapted. ALL THAT MATTERS IS WHEN YOURE IN THE HEAT OF BATTLE! THAT'S WHAT IM TRYING TO GET YOU TO UNDERSTAND! YES IM TYPING IN CAPS!THE MILITARY IS NOT A PLACE TO MEET AND HANG OUT FOR FOUR YEARS! IT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU ARE TRAINED TO KILL THE ENEMY, NOT WORRY ABOUT JOHN AND BILLS WEEKENDS TOGETHER! DONT ASK DONT TELL DID EVERYTHING IT WAS SUPPOSED TO DO!
Eh, if in the heat of battle a soldier's mind is occupied with whether or not he dislikes the fact that his comrade is a homosexual rather than the objectives of his or her mission and the survival of himself or herself and the survival of his or her squad, then that soldier has deeper issues. I don't really see how different the potential dislike a certain soldier may receive due to being homosexual is from the potential dislike a certain soldier may have for being white, black, Asian, atheist, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Jewish, etc., besides the fact that modern society has a greater dislike for the homosexual than any other, which will also change with the flow of time as has every other prejudice.
|
I saw that documentary on HBO last night and it was very engaging. I am really happy this day has come for the U.S. because it is long overdue.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 21 2011 08:37 ChampionZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:36 imallinson wrote:I was trying to find out how many people have actually been discharged from the military because of DADT and found this. There is stuff about the history of DADT there and according to their estimates over 14,000 people have been fired. So, they obviously violated the policy right? Show me a case where the accused did not out himself, and ill stfu.
Why does it matter whether they outed themselves or not, it was still a discriminatory policy that fired over 14,000 people for their sexuality. In any other profession that would be illegal.
Also there you go. I'd tell you to "stfu" but I'm already too late.
|
On September 21 2011 08:30 ChampionZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 08:25 FabledIntegral wrote:On September 21 2011 08:20 ChampionZerg wrote:On September 21 2011 08:11 GogoKodo wrote:On September 21 2011 08:03 ChampionZerg wrote:
it is my concern, that more troops will opt to fake a gay marriage, i know it sounds crazy, but its a legitmate concern, i have served you havent. I know what dirtbags like to do when they get in, and thats find some way to get a free ride. Now John and Bill, can fake their marraige, have all the benefits, move out into town, all while actually having girlfriends and not having to worry about if their girlfriends leave them. It can and will happen. And no..thats not how we went after gays either while i was in, even if someone was blatantly in flames, nothing was said or mentioned, maybe amoungst eachother, but he was a brother to us just like any other. Noone would ever think about being a little troll and outing someone, thats a piss poor thing to do. Not to mention it would not be heavily pursued as noone really cared. That's fine for your case, but DADT has definitely been used to get people fired. So if you are all cool with it and don't actually make use of the rule then why does it need to be in place? You seem to keep saying that personal sexual stuff shouldn't come up at all as it effects the mission. Then how about a UDADT (Ultra Don't Ask Don't Tell). You talk about any heterosexual stuff you can get fired if someone brings it up to your superiors. Can't talk about your girlfriend, or wife, or anyone you find attractive, ever. You're straw manning me with skewed logic and not truly interpreting what im writing. And sure thats fine with me, b/c i dont give a fuck what anyone finds attractive when im being rocket attacked in southern afghanistan. Thats the point im tryin to make. I was a sergeant, and i never dealt with someones girlfriend problems while im tryin to make sure we dont die. Its silly and childish, most of all irrelevant. If i did happen to have a gay marine, and he was suicidal over a relationship with his partner, i would treat it with the same sympathy as a straight one, as long as he wasnt causing drama within our platoon. The thing is, you guys don't know what its like to have camraderie and tight unit cohesion when youre being shot at for every day for 7 months straight, so while i value your opinion, your lack of experience causes me to stand by my opinion. Nothing can be introduced to take away the integrity of your platoon. My god no one is talking about when you're in the heat of battle. It can happen ANYWHERE. Jesus Christ man. You keep bringing up these extreme situations where no one is even TRYING to insinuate relationship talk is appropriate, or someone is going off about their significant other. But rather, say you sent an e-mail home to your boyfriend that someone read over your shoulder. You can get kicked out for something like THAT. I also don't really care about your personal experience in the military, as the military itself can, and will, change. I bet you a ton of white people felt unsafe when they had black units in their squad when there was first integration. I bet you they didn't trust each other as much. Guess what? We adapted. ALL THAT MATTERS IS WHEN YOURE IN THE HEAT OF BATTLE! THAT'S WHAT IM TRYING TO GET YOU TO UNDERSTAND! YES IM TYPING IN CAPS!THE MILITARY IS NOT A PLACE TO MEET AND HANG OUT FOR FOUR YEARS! IT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU ARE TRAINED TO KILL THE ENEMY, NOT WORRY ABOUT JOHN AND BILLS WEEKENDS TOGETHER! DONT ASK DONT TELL DID EVERYTHING IT WAS SUPPOSED TO DO! User was temp banned for this post.
Oh, I forgot you and everyone else in the military has absolutely zero contact with any significant other when they're serving in active duty and that they aren't allowed to do anything else except train to kill the enemy. No longer people, but bloodthirsty savages that only think about killing the enemy.
I'm sure you never called home, once.
I never insinuated it was a place to meet people, or get together on weekends. To be frank, you're wrong, and the majority of America seems to agree with me, not you, on what qualifies as discrimination and what should be done with our military.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
