Should we repeal "Don't ask, don't tell?"

Should we repeal this atrocity?

  • Total voters
    23
ZappasGuitar said:
Sure it did.

It helped alleviate concerns of homosexuals that their desire to serve and defend their country could be refused solely based on their sexual orientation.
Click to expand...
No, it didn't. Being gay was and is still illegal. They just cannot ask you about it. But you can and will be punished if you are caught. Or if you are accused and there are a minimum of two witnesses, if the witnesses are a pay scale above the accused (so a troop could be accused and convicted by the testimony of two NCOs, a NCO would be convicted by two SNCOs, and so on).
 
Yurt said:
LMAO....its always someone else's fault...the poor dems just can't do anything because of the republicans...according to you, they can't keep promises, have no fucking spine becuase the republicans are big meanies

thanks for the laugh

and i point out again, WHO CARES about the republicans, they do not run on a pro homosexual platform, why don't you be honest and admit the dems are pussies and why can't you accept the fact that the dems are RESPONSIBLE for the don't ask, don't tell....why do you always have to blame someone else?
Click to expand...

Help me out...someone was JUST whining about attacking the messenger...but for the life of me I can't remember who it was...do you?
 
Yog-Sothoth said:
No, it didn't. Being gay was and is still illegal. They just cannot ask you about it. But you can and will be punished if you are caught. Or if you are accused and there are a minimum of two witnesses, if the witnesses are a pay scale above the accused (so a troop could be accused and convicted by the testimony of two NCOs, a NCO would be convicted by two SNCOs, and so on).
Click to expand...

Yes...it did.

Before: If a commanding officer thought you were gay, he could ask and your refusal to answer bought you a court martial.

After: Commanding officers are NO LONGER allowed to inquire.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Yes...it did.

Before: If a commanding officer thought you were gay, he could ask and your refusal to answer bought you a court martial.

After: Commanding officers are NO LONGER allowed to inquire.
Click to expand...
No, but he's still allowed to charge you on suspicion. If he accuses you, all he needs is someone else to testify as well.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Help me out...someone was JUST whining about attacking the messenger...but for the life of me I can't remember who it was...do you?
Click to expand...

?

you made the claims, this is isn't attackign the messenger you idiot, if you can't handle being told your claims are stupid, then stop posting...all you have is:

its the republicans fault, its the republicans fault....waaaaa, waaaa...the dems can't do anything becuase of the big ol' mean republicans...waaaaa
 
Yurt said:
?

you made the claims, this is isn't attackign the messenger you idiot, if you can't handle being told your claims are stupid, then stop posting...all you have is:

its the republicans fault, its the republicans fault....waaaaa, waaaa...the dems can't do anything becuase of the big ol' mean republicans...waaaaa
Click to expand...

ZOMG...Yurtcicle is doing it right in his reply...attacking the messenger!

You calling me names is attacking the messenger. A pity you aren't even man enough to admit that much.

You can't possibly be this obtuse out in the real world?
 
Last edited:
ZappasGuitar said:
ZOMG...Yurtcicle is doing it right in his reply...attacking the messenger!

You calling me names is attacking the messenger. A pity you aren't even man enough to admit that much.

You can't possibly be this obtuse out in the real world?
Click to expand...

good lord...are you really this stupid? you run around attacking me, yet cry when i call you an idiot....and attacking the messenger is about attacking the messenger for delivering news or someone else's message, NOT your own message

get off the board you whiny baby

this what you do when you finally realize your claims have no merit, you run away from the topic and attack
 
Yurt said:
:palm:

good lord you are an idiot...please find me a case where the P&I clause was applied to the federal government
Click to expand...

You are a fucking retard.

The privileges and immunities of a US citizen are already recognized by the feds via the bill of rights and other amendments. The 14th simply said that the states may not violate the privileges and immunities of a US (federal) citizen. If the Feds do not recognize a right then it is not possible for the states to deprive them of that right.
 
thread summary:

Posters who have spent a lifetime routinely voting for the GOP, a party that has have never done one god damn thing to liberalize, accomodate, or further gay civil rights, are screeching, whining, and complaining that liberals and democrats haven't done enough for gay rights.

Hilarious.

If you routinely vote republican, you pretty much don't have a leg to stand on. If your votes routinely go to the guys that actively work against gay rights, then your right to whine and screech is rejected with extreme prejudice.
 
Cypress said:
thread summary:

Posters who have spent a lifetime routinely voting for the GOP, a party that has have never done one god damn thing to liberalize, accomodate, or further gay civil rights, are screeching, whining, and complaining that liberals and democrats haven't done enough for gay rights.

Hilarious.

If you routinely vote republican, you pretty much don't have a leg to stand on. If your votes routinely go to the guys that actively work against gay rights, then your right to whine and screech is rejected with extreme prejudice.
Click to expand...

what specific posters are you talking about?

and...are you actually saying that because of ONE issue, someone can't vote for a republican and bitch about them not being more pro homosexual and then can't say boo about dems not doing enough????

you are a pathetic hack if this is what you are saying. we have so few choices to vote for, there isn't a single candidate out there that meets all my beliefs, so i am almost always left with voting for the least harmful politician. to say that people like myself no longer have free speech to criticize the dems weak homosexual agenda, is anti american. i am not going to vote for someone just because they have a pro homosexual agenda, life is so much more than just this one issue cypress. i would have expected someone of your age to understand this, especially living in such a beautiful area.
 
RStringfield said:
You are a fucking retard.

The privileges and immunities of a US citizen are already recognized by the feds via the bill of rights and other amendments. The 14th simply said that the states may not violate the privileges and immunities of a US (federal) citizen. If the Feds do not recognize a right then it is not possible for the states to deprive them of that right.
Click to expand...

in other words, you can't find a single case that supports your viewpoint....

fact: the P&I clause was SOLELY for the states

you have nothing to support your view

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States
 
There is no need to apply the 14th because those rights already exist under the 5th. Bolling v Sharpe deals with equal protection of the laws as it applies to the Feds.
 
Yurt said:
in other words, you can't find a single case that supports your viewpoint....

fact: the P&I clause was SOLELY for the states

you have nothing to support your view

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States
Click to expand...

Apparently you are too stupid to get the point. The 14th merely said that the states cannot violate the rights guaranteed under the constitution. The 5th amendment ensures that the Feds may not violate rights to due process and equal protection under the law.
 
RStringfield said:
Apparently you are too stupid to get the point. The 14th merely said that the states cannot violate the rights guaranteed under the constitution. The 5th amendment ensures that the Feds may not violate rights to due process and equal protection under the law.
Click to expand...

lmao....you do realize you just proved my point

the 14th is for the states, and by extension the P&I clause is for the states, NOT the federal government.... thanks!

why don't you get some authority to back up your position? oh wait, none exists....see slaughterhouse cases
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top