Don't ask, don't tell

CaptBillyTheKid said:
If they were to confer benefits to straight couples and not married couples that would reek of discrimination. And there currently ARE gay married couples (those who got married before prop 8 passed for example). IF DADT was removed, they would have to be given the same benefits. I'm not against that, I'm just saying that's the reality.
Click to expand...

But it seems the number of gay couples in the military would be orders of magnitude smaller than straight couples. Let's say 10% of the general population is gay (although I think that number is high), how many of the 10% would join the military and of that number, how many would marry? And even if the answer is "all of them", how many of them would make a career out of the military, and expect a lifetime of benefits?

I know you're not against this but I wonder if the Pentagon could seriously use that as an excuse.
 
NigelTufnel said:
If discrimination against gay people were a problem we wouldn't have DADT in the first instance. Discrimination against gay people is currently constitutionally valid.
Click to expand...

So all those laws that say I can't discriminate against a persons sexuality don't actually mean I can't discriminate against a persons sexuality?
 
CaptBillyTheKid said:
Actually, no I can't. Equal protection under the law and all that (14A).
Click to expand...


Sexual orientation is not a protected class under the 14th amendment. The government (the equal protection clause only applies to government actors, not individuals) can freely discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. That's why discrimination against gay people by the military still exists today.

DADT has been challenged several times and upheld by the Courts each time it was challenged.
 
christiefan915 said:
During the SOTU, the president said: "This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."

The Joint Chiefs sat there stone-faced.

Can somebody tell me why this is even an issue? Specifics, not sound bites about morale and cohesiveness.
Click to expand...

Its an issue because lilberals need to cause a problem, ...they need the voters in a perpetual state of crisis.....
And he lies...homos ARE NOT DENIED the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.

They are denied the freedom to 'flaunt' their sexuality in a public way while in the service of their country....
they are denied the freedom to act in a way "unbecoming a member of US Armed Services"......the same as any soldier, sailor, etc.....
 
bravo said:
Its an issue because lilberals need to cause a problem, ...they need the voters in a perpetual state of crisis.....
And he lies...homos ARE NOT DENIED the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.

They are denied the freedom to 'flaunt' their sexuality in a public way while in the service of their country....
they are denied the freedom to act in a way "unbecoming a member of US Armed Services"......the same as any soldier, sailor, etc.....
Click to expand...
Uhhh no.... Sodomy is illegal according the the UCMJ.
 
Southern Man said:
Folks choose to be queer, so in this case those arguments are valid.
Click to expand...

You continually make the claim that they choose to be gay. And yet, the overwhelming majority of scientific evidence points to that being incorrect.

At least they are willing to step up and serve.
 
CaptBillyTheKid said:
Winter, being a scientist is a synonym for being a 'queer enabler'.
Click to expand...

Yes, and they are all involved in promoting the homosexual agenda. I have heard him say that before.

If he says it enough maybe he will believe it. Then at least one person will believe.
 
CaptBillyTheKid said:
Uhhh no.... Sodomy is illegal according the the UCMJ.
Click to expand...

As is oral sex and sex with an animal.....if you can't abide by the rules, don't join the party.....its not a right to serve in the military...some just imagine it is.
You all have a choice....
 
You won't last long in the service if your a filthy, unwashed, smelly pig either....
you see, the other members of the service that must be exposed to you have rights too.....
thats why theres rules folks....
 
bravo said:
As is oral sex and sex with an animal.....if you can't abide by the rules, don't join the party.....its not a right to serve in the military...some just imagine it is.
You all have a choice....
Click to expand...
One that is bigoted against gays. Further the 134 can be used against any amount of same sex partnership, from kissing and hand holding to sodomy. I've seen it happen.
 
bravo said:
As is oral sex and sex with an animal.....if you can't abide by the rules, don't join the party.....its not a right to serve in the military...some just imagine it is.
You all have a choice....
Click to expand...

Newsflash for you, oral sex IS sodomy. And if they kicked everyone out of the military who ever engaged in sodomy, the people left couldn't protect a rowboat in Nebraska.

I have no problem with kicking people out of the military who violate the UCMJ. What I have a problem with is selectively targeting one group while allowing another group to break the same laws with impunity.
 
Southern Man said:
Folks choose to be queer, so in this case those arguments are valid.
Click to expand...

How does choice change anything?

People choose their religions. Any soldier who complained that he could not serve with another of a different faith would likely be thrown out of the military.
 
WinterBorn said:
Newsflash for you, oral sex IS sodomy. And if they kicked everyone out of the military who ever engaged in sodomy, the people left couldn't protect a rowboat in Nebraska.

I have no problem with kicking people out of the military who violate the UCMJ. What I have a problem with is selectively targeting one group while allowing another group to break the same laws with impunity.
Click to expand...

I agree....don't get fucked in the ass or suck a dick in the barracks and there should be no problem....in other words .... don't get caught, as in any activity that breaks your organizations rules....that doesn't mean just the rules about sex, that doesn't mean the rules should be overlooked....
and of course, no one group should be selectively targeted....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top